Introduction

Having migrated numerous clients to Amazon Connect, we frequently encounter two common challenges:

1.    Amazon Connect doesn’t provide full global number coverage.

2.    Amazon Connect isn’t necessarily cheaper than license-based contact center vendors.

A recent migration project provides a practical example of how to effectively overcome these challenges.

‍

Challenges and Solutions

Global Number Coverage:

The existing vendor system for our client included a cloud contact center and a global number routing service. The commercial terms werepay-as-you-go for both usage and monthly licenses, allowing costs to be lowered as services were transitioned away.

Solution: When migrating to Amazon Connect, it was true that Connect did not offer all the required global numbers. However, this did not preclude a successful migration. We combined the global numbers available through Connect with the global routing service of the existing vendor for numbers Connect could not provide. The existing vendor was already using number redirection under the covers, so no additional latency was created by placing the instance in the same region.

‍

Cost Considerations:

To justify the migration, we mapped out the commercial impacts through the months of transitioning from the existing vendor to AmazonConnect. This included periods of overlapping costs and eventual cost reductions as the existing services were phased out.

Solution: The detailed cost analysis showed a significant ongoing yearly saving of just under £500K, making the business case for migration compelling and easy to approve.

‍

‍

Deeper Insights into Cost Concerns:

The perception that Amazon Connect isn’t commercially favourable often arises when all features, like Contact Lens and Q, are enabled in the pricing calculator. While these additional features can increase costs, they also provide new capabilities that drive business change and add value.Moreover, the consumption-based pricing model for add-on services like ContactLens allows for a phased implementation. This enables small teams or business units to pilot new features, proving their value before broader rollout. Such incremental improvement models are much more difficult to implement with legacy license-based vendor offerings.

‍

Final Implementation:

The example discussed involved moving the customer to a foundation of voice-only services, which was commercially attractive. The strategic approach allowed for cost-effective scaling and adoption of new functionalities over time.

‍

Conclusion

The successful migration to Amazon Connect, despite initial challenges with global number coverage and cost, demonstrated significant savings and added business value. By leveraging a hybrid approach with existing vendor services for global routing and adopting a phased implementation of new features, we provided a robust and scalable solution for the client. This case study illustrates that with careful planning and analysis, Amazon Connect can offer both cost savings and enhanced capabilities compared to traditional license-based contact center solutions.

‍