We are not another chatbot vendor.
There are hundreds of companies selling AI that handles your contacts more cheaply. We are not one of them, and the difference is not marketing — it is the opposite business model.
Everyone else gets paid when the phone rings.
We get paid when it stops.
Almost every vendor in this market makes money in proportion to your contact volume. Per seat, per minute, per interaction, per bot session, per resolution. Their revenue grows when your volume grows. Not one of them is lying about it — it is simply how the category is priced.
It does mean nobody in your supply chain has a commercial reason to ask whether those contacts should be happening at all.
That question is the entire product.
What the market sells
Handle the contact for less.
Automation, deflection, agent assist, summarisation. All legitimate. All priced against volume.
What we sell
Find out why the contact happened.
Then price it, name the owner, and remove it. Fewer contacts is the outcome, not a side effect.
Not adjectives. Constraints we can’t quietly drop later.
Any vendor can claim to be different. These are things that would require us to change the business to stop being true.
-
We never act on your contact centre
AURA produces recommendations. Your existing platform decides whether to follow them. There is no execution path, no write access, and no autonomy roadmap. When our model is wrong, your current routing rules happen exactly as they do today. That is a constraint, and it is why this is deployable inside a change-controlled contact centre without a procurement programme.
-
We sit alongside your platform, never replace it
No migration, no cutover, no displacement of Genesys or NICE or Avaya or whoever you run. We have no interest in that fight and no capacity to win it. It also means switching us off is a configuration change rather than a project — which should make buying us considerably less frightening.
-
We have no systems integrator channel
No professional services arm, no implementation partners, no referral margin. Nothing in the revenue model rewards making your deployment complicated, and there is nobody between us and you with an incentive to extend the project. If it takes six months to get value, we have failed and you should stop paying us.
-
Our best outcome reduces your bill
AURA Source is priced against the volume we analyse, not the volume you handle. If we do our job and your avoidable contacts fall, your analysis gets cheaper and so does your contact centre. We are aware this is a strange thing to build. It is also the only honest way to sell demand elimination.
Where we sit against things you may already have
Most of these are good products solving real problems. Several of them you should probably own. They answer different questions.
| Category | The question it answers | Relationship to AURA |
|---|---|---|
| Chatbots and virtual agents | Can we handle this contact without a person? | Complementary, but sequence matters. Automating a contact caused by a defect means paying to industrialise the defect. Classify first, then automate what remains. |
| Agent assist and copilots | Can we make this agent faster and more accurate? | Complementary. Improves handling; says nothing about whether the contact should have existed. |
| Speech and text analytics | What is being said, and how? | Closest neighbour, different output. Analytics gives you a tool to explore. We give you a finished, ranked, priced list of causes with owners attached. Exploration is a job; a ledger is a decision. |
| Quality management | How well was this contact handled? | Orthogonal. QM scores the handling. We ask whether the contact should have existed at all. |
| CCaaS platform routing | Where should this contact go? | We advise it, we don’t replace it. AURA Route scores destinations against your resolution history and hands the recommendation to your platform. |
| Customer journey analytics | What path did this customer take? | Overlapping. Journey tools are strong on sequence and weak on cause and cost. We are the reverse. |
| Consultancy-led demand reviews | What is driving our contacts, this once? | Genuinely the closest substitute, and often excellent. The difference is repeatability — a consultancy review is a point-in-time sample at project cost. This runs continuously so you can tell whether a fix actually worked. |
If you already run speech analytics and someone has the time to interrogate it properly against a defect taxonomy, you may not need AURA Source. That is a real answer and we would rather give it than sell you something you can already do.
The list matters more than the feature list
Every one of these would be straightforward to add and would make the product easier to sell. Each is left out on purpose.
- Autonomous action. No writing to your platform, no auto-routing, no self-executing anything.
- Customer-facing conversation. We never speak to your customers. No bots, no deflection, no IVR replacement.
- Agent monitoring. Nothing here scores individuals. Point it at people and it stops being about the system, which is where the causes actually live.
- Contact suppression. We will not help you make yourself harder to reach and call it demand reduction.
- Data resale. Your data produces your reports. Aggregate benchmark use is separately opted into, off by default, and publishes nothing traceable to one company.
- Outcome claims we can’t evidence. No uplift percentages until design partners produce them, with methodology stated.
Three honest disqualifications
You want to cut headcount this quarter. Demand elimination works upstream and lands over quarters, not weeks. If you need immediate cost reduction, deflection tooling will get you there faster and we would rather say so now.
Nobody outside the contact centre will act on the findings. The output is a bill for other departments. If your organisation has no mechanism for that conversation, you will get an interesting document and no change. This is the single biggest predictor of whether this works.
You want one vendor to own the whole contact centre. We are deliberately a component that sits alongside things. If your strategy is consolidation onto a single suite, we are the wrong shape.
“You’re one person. Why would we buy from you?”
Fair, and worth answering directly rather than hoping it doesn’t come up.
The honest risk: Centrum AURA is one engineer in Austria. There is no support rota, no account team, and a real bus factor. For a rip-and-replace platform decision that would be disqualifying, and you should not buy a core routing platform from a solo founder.
Why it works here anyway: nothing we sell is load-bearing. AURA Route advises a platform that keeps running perfectly well without it. AURA Source produces reports; if it went dark tomorrow you would keep the reports and your helpdesk would be untouched. The blast radius of us failing is that you stop getting advice.
What you get in exchange: the person who answers your email is the person who wrote the classifier and has thirty years of Genesys, integration and architecture work behind him. There is no first-line script, no ticket triage, and no account manager relaying your question to engineering. For a diagnostic product, that is not a consolation prize — it is most of the value.
If the concern is continuity rather than capability, ask about escrow and data portability. Both are reasonable requests and the answer is yes.