In this guide
How should an enterprise evaluate conversational AI?
Select a defined workflow, agree on measurable acceptance criteria and test the complete path from customer request to confirmed business outcome. Evaluate integrations, human handoff, data handling, change control, reliability and total cost alongside conversation quality. A persuasive demo is a starting point; a reviewable pilot is the basis for a deployment decision.
Choose an operating model before a platform
Enterprise conversational AI can mean a customer lifecycle workflow, a contact-center program or a custom application. Start with the model your team needs to operate. This shortlist is written by Assistable and compares documented approaches rather than ranking performance.
For a defined revenue or service workflow, evaluate Assistable on the complete path from inquiry to confirmed action. If you also need contact-center routing, agent desktops or a custom application stack, include those requirements explicitly. Give every shortlisted platform the same pilot brief and ask it to demonstrate the same failure cases.
| Platform and fit | Documented approach | Verify for your deployment |
|---|---|---|
| Assistable: qualification, follow-up and service workflows | Dashboard assistant setup, visual rules, staged flow versions, connected business tools and configured human transfers | Your CRM/calendar operations, exception handling, implementation owner and support scope |
| Kore.ai: broader customer-service and contact-center programs | AI for Service combines AI agents, contact-center routing, agent assistance, quality assurance and outbound campaigns | Which modules you need, how they connect to your current operation and who owns rollout |
| Cognigy: voice and digital agents connected to contact-center systems | Configurable endpoints for webchat, SIP-based Voice Gateway, APIs and named contact-center integrations | The exact endpoint, telephony path, context passed during handoff and required integration work |
| Rasa: conversational applications with custom business logic | Visual or YAML flows define dialogue and decisions; Python custom actions connect APIs and backend systems | Who maintains flows, custom actions and deployment infrastructure, plus your chosen voice and handoff path |
Write a one-page pilot brief
Describe the customer, channel, trigger, authorized actions and completion condition. For lead qualification, define an eligible lead and the information a salesperson needs. For scheduling, name the calendar and the record that proves a booking exists. For service, distinguish an answer from a resolved request.
Record the current process and a comparable baseline before choosing targets. Keep acquisition source, opening hours and workflow scope consistent when comparing results. Decide how repeat callers, duplicate leads, unsupported requests and abandoned conversations enter the denominator. These choices can change the apparent result more than the agent itself.
- Name one accountable business owner and one technical owner.
- List required systems, data fields, human teams and operating hours.
- Define excluded tasks and the route for requests outside scope.
- Agree on the evidence needed to expand, revise or end the pilot.
Score evidence against each requirement
Mark every requirement as unverified, documented, demonstrated or accepted in your pilot. Keep an evidence link, review date and owner beside the result. A missing mandatory requirement should remain visible even when the overall demonstration is impressive. Set any scoring weights with the buying team before comparing vendors.
| Requirement | Evidence to request | Acceptance question |
|---|---|---|
| Workflow fit | Recorded scenario plus destination record | Did the intended action complete correctly? |
| Integration | Supported operations and failure cases | Who owns authentication, errors and maintenance? |
| Handoff | Successful and unanswered transfers | Can a person continue with the right context? |
| Governance | Permissions, release process and test results | Can unauthorized actions be prevented and investigated? |
| Reliability | Representative load and recovery evidence | What happens when a dependency is unavailable? |
| Data handling | Data map, policies and applicable contract | Are processing, retention and access acceptable? |
| Economics | Complete cost model and measured outcomes | What does an accepted outcome actually cost? |
What you can inspect in Assistable today
Start with the recorded call handoff, then use the product references to define your own acceptance tests. The evidence below covers product behavior and documented controls. It does not establish your deployment's conversion rate, capacity or contractual service level.
| Evidence | What it supports | What your pilot still needs |
|---|---|---|
| Recorded transfer with timestamped dialogue | The caller hears hold music, an introduction and a person take over | Your receiving-side briefing and unanswered-transfer behavior |
| Flow testing and version documentation | Node and variable inspection; draft changes separated from a published flow | Your approved branch paths, release record and recovery procedure |
| Monitor-rule and alert API references | Configurable call/chat evaluation, routing and resolution tracking | Rule accuracy, actual alert delivery and a staffed review process |
| Platform-tool and Direct references | Supported actions and the current appointment integration boundary | Your actual read/write operations in the destination system |
Use a test set that can expose a weak deployment
Start with normal requests, then add corrections, interruptions, ambiguous answers and missing information. Include unavailable calendar slots, an expired credential, a rejected write and an unanswered transfer. For voice, use actual phone calls as well as the builder's test interface. Listening to one clean sample cannot establish production behavior.
Inspect the system of record after each consequential action. A booking requires the intended calendar entry. A contact update requires the correct record and fields. An escalation requires a usable destination and clear ownership. Record the scenario, expected result, actual result and follow-up owner. Re-run failed cases after changes, along with cases that previously passed.
Define the result before reporting improvement
Choose a small set of business outcomes and keep separate measures for experience and safety. A high automation rate is not useful if customers must call again to finish the task. An increase in appointments is not automatically an increase in attended appointments or collected revenue.
| Measure | Working definition | Check alongside it |
|---|---|---|
| Qualification rate | Qualified leads divided by eligible leads | Qualification accuracy and salesperson acceptance |
| Booking completion | Confirmed bookings divided by eligible booking requests | Correct calendar, duplicates and cancellations |
| Show rate | Attended appointments divided by appointments due | Comparable lead source and appointment window |
| Resolution rate | Verified completed requests divided by eligible requests | Recontacts, complaints and unresolved exceptions |
| Cost per accepted outcome | All attributable pilot costs divided by accepted outcomes | Human review, integration work and ongoing support |
Compare the complete deployment cost
Request a model for expected, low and peak usage. Include the platform commitment, voice and messaging usage, phone numbers, knowledge retrieval, quality evaluations, implementation, integration maintenance and human handling. Ask how short calls, retries, test traffic and transfers affect the bill. Confirm which items are included in the proposal.
Assistable's billing documentation separates voice, messaging, knowledge, observation and number charges. Use the current pricing page and your written proposal for applicable rates. A headline minute price alone does not describe a workflow that also retrieves knowledge, evaluates quality and sends follow-up messages. Separate one-time implementation cost from recurring operating cost.
Make the decision reviewable
Ask procurement and security to review data handling and contract requirements while the technical pilot runs. Record requested controls, their documented scope and any open gaps. Do not substitute a provider's certification for evidence about the platform and deployment you are buying.
Close the pilot with the agreed scorecard, observed outcomes, unresolved failures, full cost and operating plan. Assign owners for monitoring, exception handling, connection maintenance and future changes. Expansion should follow the evidence from the scoped workflow, with fresh tests whenever new channels, actions or customer groups change the risk.
Common questions
How should we set pilot acceptance thresholds?
Agree on thresholds for each outcome before testing. Set stricter acceptance rules for consequential actions than for recoverable misunderstandings. State the sample, denominator and business impact beside every threshold, then have the business owner approve the criteria.
Does a native integration remove implementation work?
No. A native connector still needs the correct account, permissions, fields and workflow configuration. Demonstrate the exact read and write operations your use case needs, including their failure paths. A custom API connection requires an explicit implementation and maintenance owner.
Sources and review notes
- Recorded call-transfer demonstration
The private receiving-side briefing is not separately audible.
- Kore.ai AI for Service
Provider's published product scope; deployment fit must be evaluated.
- Cognigy endpoints and connections
- Rasa flows and custom actions
- Testing your agent
- Flow staging and publication
- Monitor rules and routing
- Alert evidence and resolution state
- Platform tools and supported actions
- Assistable Direct integration scope
- Billing documentation
Consult current pricing and the proposal for your rates.
- Assistable trust center