Quadient Inspire Review

Single tool for both data and composition handling


What is our primary use case?

  • Replacing nine legacy composition tools with a single tool
  • Streamlining customer solutions and enhancing customer's channel options
  • Creating highly personalised communications.

How has it helped my organization?

Inspire has allowed us to provide better solutions to customer and reduce overheads of single-skilled resources. Timeframes to deliver solutions are greatly reduced.

What is most valuable?

  • Single tool for both data and composition handling
  • Multiple options in approach and dynamic content inclusion make for great flexibility and benefits internally and externally.

What needs improvement?

Many of the features that are problematic in the version that we use (R10.4) are resolved in later releases (R12 is current). The one area that Quadient (historically) has been weak in is in the licensing and cost for some modules. Quadient are aware of this and are being proactive in improving this aspect. They have a great roadmap and understanding of the ever-evolving CCM industry, actively seeking out feedback from users and insights on how they can continuously improve the product.

For how long have I used the solution?

Three to five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is great for the core product, and following a standardised coding process will enable error logging for debugging and production support.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of the solution is solid; it requires an organisation to be flexible with resource allocation, understanding of peak times, and potential overheads created by poor execution of coding/deployment.

How is customer service and technical support?

I've always found the customer service/technical support to be excellent. Folks are willing to provide support and go the extra mile to assist if the knowledge is not known directly.

Which solutions did we use previously?

xPression (and other platforms). The switch to Inspire was driven by reducing overheads in multiple legacy platforms, many of which were required to support a single function of a multi-function solution. The Inspire single solution was by far a better option.

How was the initial setup?

Setup was complex from an internal perspective given disparates of legacy platforms and taking a 'like-for-like' approach to migration. Also, not taking the advice of the vendor contributed to complexity.

What about the implementation team?

A mixture of both, vendor supplied a large team from differing locales. Knowledge was excellent from the core vendor team.

What was our ROI?

The reduction in legacy platforms and costs associated with licensing and resourcing has contributed positively to ROI.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The licensing and setup costs historically have been a roadblock, but there have been improvements on this over the years as things move into the cloud. The cost vs benefits argument often leads businesses to go with the 'cheaper' option that ends in buyer's remorse.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

The business looked at other options including PReS but chose GMC Inspire.

What other advice do I have?

Would suggest that having a talk with Quadient and actual users of the product is the best way to go when making a decision, and understanding longer-term benefits when factoring in costs.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Add a Comment
Guest
Sign Up with Email