voicexml and salt: which is best for you? eric jackson, vp strategy & business development

VoiceXML and SALT: Which is Best For You?VoiceXML and SALT: Which is Best For You?

Eric Jackson, VP Strategy & Business DevelopmentEric Jackson, VP Strategy & Business Development

Private and Confidential

Evolution of VoiceXML:Evolution of VoiceXML:VoiceGenie There From BeginningVoiceGenie There From Beginning

PML

VoxML

SpeechML

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

600 Members of

VoiceXML Forum

30,000 VoiceXML

Developers

2002

VoiceXML 2.0 Published

VoiceXML 1.0 Published


VoiceXML: The HTML of the Voice WebVoiceXML: The HTML of the Voice Web


VoiceXML Momentum:VoiceXML Momentum:

• VoiceXML 2.0 Published (Oct. ‘01)• Analysts forecast $5 - 41B industry in 4 years• VoiceXML Forum same size as WAP Forum • Over 30,000 active VoiceXML developers• 5000 apps built on VoiceGenie by developers from 128 countries• Significant announcements every week from major players

A growing percentage of RFPs to SpeechWorks cite VoiceXML in their specifications. As of October 2001, this percentage was 62%, up from 23% during the start of 2001 -Call Center Magazine, December 5, 2001


Why VoiceXML? Why VoiceXML?

• Open standard: IVR is proprietary

• Mature (2 Years Old; 2.0 Published)

• 12x Faster developing VoiceXML apps compared to IVR

• Off-The-Shelf: 5000 apps developed already on VoiceGenie

• Less Expensive: IVR requires 2nd silo infrastructure from Web infrastructure

“What used to take me 6 months on Periphonics, takes me 2 weeks on VoiceGenie.” -Chuck Grandgent, Application Manager, Octave Communications, on VoiceXML application development compared to traditional IVR. October, 2001


Leverage Existing Web InfrastructureLeverage Existing Web Infrastructurewith VoiceXMLwith VoiceXML

• Migrate customers to

Internet

• Common infrastructure

& support

• VoiceXML provides

Web-centric support,

without costly ties

Open, Web System& Support

Web & IVR Systemw ith

Com m on Support

Propietary IVR System & Support

OLD, Expensive

New, Cost Eff ective


VoiceXML Surpasses IVR Solutions: VoiceXML Surpasses IVR Solutions: Don’t Be Left BehindDon’t Be Left Behind

Source: Datamonitor & Kelsey Group

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 20060.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

$B

VoiceXML

Speech IVR

DTMF – IVR


VoiceXML in the Call Center: Applications

•Provide full self-service automation

•Work with CSRs to automate repetitive parts of service calls

•Provide personalized customer experience by accessing existing information systems

•Enhance Routing of Calls to the correct CSRs or automated application


The Advantage of VoiceXML vs. IVR:The Advantage of VoiceXML vs. IVR:

Faster

and

Less Costly



• Shorter Deployment Schedule:

• IVR hardware has to be purchased first before application development can begin

• VoiceXML application can be prototyped on VoiceGenie’s Developer Workshop before VoiceXML Gateway is purchased or even available as pre-packaged app

• IVR application takes, on average, 14-18 months to deploy

• VoiceXML application takes, on average, 6 - 9 months to deploy



•Lower Professional Services Costs:

•IVR Professional Services are 50% more because there is no competition (due to proprietary nature)

•For Significant Applications:

• IVR P/S costs $2500 – $3500 per day and is usually engaged for 9 – 12 person-months

• VoiceXML P/S costs $1000 – $1500 per day and is usually engaged for 4 – 6 person-months or completed by the customer



•Lower Ongoing Maintenance Costs:

•IVR annual maintenance costs on software are, on average, 30% because proprietary nature creates monopolistic pricing

•VoiceGenie and partners annual maintenance costs on software are 15% -20%



•Lower Software Upgrade Costs:

•IVR software, on average, has to be replaced every 2.5 years with a forklift upgrade costing approximately 50% of the initial software costs

•VoiceGenie’s VoiceXML software has point releases of its software that is included in the annual 20% maintenance fees



•Lower Costs for Application Modifications:

•Companies who deploy IVR normally budget $10,000 per month for P/S costs in making IVR application modifications

•With VoiceXML applications, companies’ existing technical staff can easily make application modifications



•Lower Costs for Backend Integration:

•With IVR, companies usually allocate 50% of their application development budget (or, on average, $250,000) for backend integration costs

•VoiceXML raises no backend integration issues because it reuses existing Web infrastructure


SALT and VoiceXMLSALT and VoiceXMLwill co-exist:will co-exist:

• SALT appeals to Web developers and those building multimodal applications (for which no standard yet exists)

• VoiceXML appeals to telcos and traditional IVR base because of greater control over voice-only applications

• VoiceXML is on version 2.0; SALT is still in its infancy

• VoiceGenie has joined the SALT Forum as a Contributor to help our customers deploy multimodal applications


DINOSAURS DON’T BELONG IN CALL CENTERSDINOSAURS DON’T BELONG IN CALL CENTERS

They’re way too cumbersome, and not so adaptable after all.


Summary of Advantages of VoiceXML Summary of Advantages of VoiceXML over Dinosaur IVR Systemsover Dinosaur IVR Systems

• VoiceXML offers faster and more accurate call routing

• Automate most repetitive requests (e.g., change of address)

• Shorter deployments

• Lower P/S costs

• Lower Maintenance and upgrade

• Lower Costs for App Devt and modifications

• Lower Backend Integration Costs

voicexml and salt: which is best for you? eric jackson, vp strategy & business development

Documents

voicexml apps

voicexml gateway

confidentialwhy voicexml

members of voicexml

ivr solutions

ivr hardware

traditional ivr

ivr ps costs