As high as the expectations have been around WebRTC, so too have been misconceptions about its use. For example, WebRTC offers the capability to start a call from a browser, but it does not handle call routing and addressing like a telephone network does -- meaning, it won't change person-to-person communications. So, unlike a telephone network, you can't rely on just WebRTC itself to call a friend or a colleague on his or her browser.
Although the use cases for WebRTC are more limited than some had hoped, the fact remains that the technology can add tremendous value to specific applications. This is especially true for enterprise contact centers, for which I have outlined a few different WebRTC use cases below.
- Receiving support calls from within the browser. WebRTC allows support agents to receive and answer calls inside their browsers without requiring complex computer-telephony integration and plug-ins. WebRTC helps make virtualization of the contact center possible: Because agents can use WebRTC-enabled browsers for communications, they are not tied to a specific desk or device, which means an organization can reduce size requirements for physical office spaces and be more flexible when recruiting agents. Use of WebRTC also can lead to lower costs and a reduction in suppliers, since agents no longer require expensive SIP phones.
What makes this scenario particularly attractive is that contact centers can have their agents use a browser that supports WebRTC, such as Chrome v28 and above or Firefox v23 and above. Note, however, that at this time neither Microsoft nor Apple support WebRTC on their respective browsers, Internet Explorer and Safari, and that the majority of older browser versions aren't WebRTC capable, either. Although generally significant, this barrier does not matter in this use case, which makes it the most compelling one in the short term.
- WebRTC-based communications can replace inbound toll-free numbers. WebRTC allows for click-to-call communications, creating a new channel for users to communicate with the enterprise. This feature streamlines communications and is easily embeddable in any company website or email signature. This means customers do not have to scour the website to find the right number to call, and then have to turn to another channel -- meaning, a landline or mobile phone -- to place the call. Rather, they can place calls directly from a company's webpage by clicking a button. With the use of high-definition (HD) voice, the customer also experiences improved call quality.
Enterprises can save time and money with WebRTC, too. Utilizing the Web eliminates the per-minute fees associated with toll-free numbers, substantially reducing the cost of inbound calling for enterprises.
In addition, enterprises will benefit from reduced handling time through the collection of customer context. For instance, when a customer signs in and searches a website for something specific, then uses the WebRTC click-to-call feature, the agent will receive that context automatically. This typically reduces the total time spent on the call by cutting out the information-gathering process.
- WebRTC enables live video support. Video calling is yet another advantage for contact centers using WebRTC. Services like Amazon's Mayday and American Express's live video chat help show that the interaction between a contact center and the user is enhanced with video calling. While enterprises can add live video chat through a new application like the Mayday Button (which is likely based on technology very similar to WebRTC), they can add a WebRTC click-to-video-call button by simply adding just a couple of lines of code.
Expectations
In the coming year, WebRTC has the potential to make the move from a novel technology that people use for free communications to a business-related or subscription-based service for contact centers.
Whether or not this happens will depend on three primary factors:
- Will Microsoft's new browser, Spartan (to be released in the second half of 2015), support WebRTC? Rumors suggest WebRTC support is on the Spartan wish list, but pressure to deliver a product to the market in a timely manner may force Microsoft to postpone that to the following release. Inclusion of WebRTC support in Spartan will mark another step toward reaching critical mass for WebRTC support in browsers. If Microsoft decides not to add WebRTC support in the upcoming version of its browser, this will slow things down.
- Will the industry giants all support the main video codecs? More specifically, will Microsoft support VP8/9, and will Google support H.264? Feedback from Microsoft's Windows 10 preview builds seem to indicate Microsoft will support VP8 is supported (and apparently, it already has some Spartan components). Whether Google will support H.264 is less likely, and as you read here, it's complicated.
- Will the quality be sufficient?
As WebRTC starts to be used in business-related or subscription-based services, customers will expect to see an increase in the quality of their experience, which will surpass what the traditional telephone network offers. As HD audio and video features become available through WebRTC, however, drop-outs, echoes, and other user experience issues common to using the public Internet will likely continue to limit its use and value. Some solutions aim to minimize the impacts of issues on the LAN or traffic congestion in the open Internet. Figuring out how to assure quality of service will be critical in allowing WebRTC to truly take off.
So sit back (or do something about it), and let's see what unfolds.
Dries Plasman is vice president of marketing and product management at Voxbone.
What makes this scenario particularly attractive is that contact centers can have their agents use a browser that supports WebRTC, such as Chrome v28 and above or Firefox v23 and above. Note, however, that at this time neither Microsoft nor Apple support WebRTC on their respective browsers, Internet Explorer and Safari, and that the majority of older browser versions aren't WebRTC capable, either. Although generally significant, this barrier does not matter in this use case, which makes it the most compelling one in the short term.
WebRTC-based communications can replace inbound toll-free numbers. WebRTC allows for click-to-call communications, creating a new channel for users to communicate with the enterprise. This feature streamlines communications and is easily embeddable in any company website or email signature. This means customers do not have to scour the website to find the right number to call, and then have to turn to another channel -- meaning, a landline or mobile phone -- to place the call. Rather, they can place calls directly from a company's webpage by clicking a button. With the use of high-definition (HD) voice, the customer also experiences improved call quality.
Enterprises can save time and money with WebRTC, too. Utilizing the Web eliminates the per-minute fees associated with toll-free numbers, substantially reducing the cost of inbound calling for enterprises.
In addition, enterprises will benefit from reduced handling time through the collection of customer context. For instance, when a customer signs in and searches a website for something specific, then uses the WebRTC click-to-call feature, the agent will receive that context automatically. This typically reduces the total time spent on the call by cutting out the information-gathering process.
WebRTC enables live video support. Video calling is yet another advantage for contact centers using WebRTC. Services like Amazon's Mayday and American Express's live video chat help show that the interaction between a contact center and the user is enhanced with video calling. While enterprises can add live video chat through a new application like the Mayday Button (which is likely based on technology very similar to WebRTC), they can add a WebRTC click-to-video-call button by simply adding just a couple of lines of code.
Expectations
In the coming year, WebRTC has the potential to make the move from a novel technology that people use for free communications to a business-related or subscription-based service for contact centers.
Whether or not this happens will depend on three primary factors:
- Will Microsoft's new browser, Spartan (to be released in the second half of 2015), support WebRTC? Rumors suggest WebRTC support is on the Spartan wish list, but pressure to deliver a product to the market in a timely manner may force Microsoft to postpone that to the following release. Inclusion of WebRTC support in Spartan will mark another step toward reaching critical mass for WebRTC support in browsers. If Microsoft decides not to add WebRTC support in the upcoming version of its browser, this will slow things down.
- Will the industry giants all support the main video codecs? More specifically, will Microsoft support VP8/9, and will Google support H.264? Feedback from Microsoft's Windows 10 preview builds seem to indicate Microsoft will support VP8 is supported (and apparently, it already has some Spartan components). Whether Google will support H.264 is less likely, and as you read here, it's complicated.
- Will the quality be sufficient?
As WebRTC starts to be used in business-related or subscription-based services, customers will expect to see an increase in the quality of their experience, which will surpass what the traditional telephone network offers. As HD audio and video features become available through WebRTC, however, drop-outs, echoes, and other user experience issues common to using the public Internet will likely continue to limit its use and value. Some solutions aim to minimize the impacts of issues on the LAN or traffic congestion in the open Internet. Figuring out how to assure quality of service will be critical in allowing WebRTC to truly take off.
Will Microsoft's new browser, Spartan (to be released in the second half of 2015), support WebRTC? Rumors suggest WebRTC support is on the Spartan wish list, but pressure to deliver a product to the market in a timely manner may force Microsoft to postpone that to the following release. Inclusion of WebRTC support in Spartan will mark another step toward reaching critical mass for WebRTC support in browsers. If Microsoft decides not to add WebRTC support in the upcoming version of its browser, this will slow things down.
Will the industry giants all support the main video codecs? More specifically, will Microsoft support VP8/9, and will Google support H.264? Feedback from Microsoft's Windows 10 preview builds seem to indicate Microsoft will support VP8 is supported (and apparently, it already has some Spartan components). Whether Google will support H.264 is less likely, and as you read here, it's complicated.
Will the quality be sufficient?
As WebRTC starts to be used in business-related or subscription-based services, customers will expect to see an increase in the quality of their experience, which will surpass what the traditional telephone network offers. As HD audio and video features become available through WebRTC, however, drop-outs, echoes, and other user experience issues common to using the public Internet will likely continue to limit its use and value. Some solutions aim to minimize the impacts of issues on the LAN or traffic congestion in the open Internet. Figuring out how to assure quality of service will be critical in allowing WebRTC to truly take off.
So sit back (or do something about it), and let's see what unfolds.
Dries Plasman is vice president of marketing and product management at Voxbone.
