IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mup/actaun/actaun_2019067061541.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chatbots for Enterprises: Outlook

Author

Listed:
  • Pavel Kostelník

    (Department of Informatics, Faculty of Business and Economics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Ivo Pisařovic

    (Department of Informatics, Faculty of Business and Economics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • Mikuláš Muroň

    (Department of Informatics, Faculty of Business and Economics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • František Dařena

    (Department of Informatics, Faculty of Business and Economics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

  • David Procházka

    (Department of Informatics, Faculty of Business and Economics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Chatbots are going to be the main tool for automated conversations with customers. Still, there is no consistent methodology for choosing a suitable chatbot platform for a particular business. This paper proposes a new method for chatbot platform evaluation. To describe the current state of chatbot platforms, two high-level approaches to chatbot platform design are discussed and compared. WYSIWYG platforms aim to simplicity but may lack some advanced features. All-purpose chatbot platforms require extensive technical skills and are more expensive but give their users more freedom in chatbot design. We provide an evaluation of six major chatbot solutions. The proposed method for the chatbot selection is demonstrated on two sample businesses - a large bank and a small taxi service.

Suggested Citation

  • Pavel Kostelník & Ivo Pisařovic & Mikuláš Muroň & František Dařena & David Procházka, 2019. "Chatbots for Enterprises: Outlook," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(6), pages 1541-1550.
    • Handle: RePEc:mup:actaun:actaun_2019067061541
    DOI: 10.11118/actaun201967061541
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://acta.mendelu.cz/doi/10.11118/actaun201967061541.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://acta.mendelu.cz/doi/10.11118/actaun201967061541.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.11118/actaun201967061541?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    2. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    2. Lim, Chulmin & Rowsell, Joe & Kim, Seongcheol, 2023. "Exploring the killer domains to create new value: A Comparative case study of Canadian and Korean telcos," 32nd European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2023: Realising the digital decade in the European Union – Easier said than done? 277998, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    3. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Stochastic preference analysis in numerical preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 628-633.
    5. Baffoe, Gideon, 2019. "Exploring the utility of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in ranking livelihood activities for effective and sustainable rural development interventions in developing countries," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 197-204.
    6. Lucas, Rochelle Irene & Promentilla, Michael Angelo & Ubando, Aristotle & Tan, Raymond Girard & Aviso, Kathleen & Yu, Krista Danielle, 2017. "An AHP-based evaluation method for teacher training workshop on information and communication technology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 93-100.
    7. J Aznar & J Ferrís-Oñate & F Guijarro, 2010. "An ANP framework for property pricing combining quantitative and qualitative attributes," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 61(5), pages 740-755, May.
    8. repec:jle:journl:132 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 794-801.
    10. Mumtaz Karatas, 2017. "Multiattribute Decision Making Using Multiperiod Probabilistic Weighted Fuzzy Axiomatic Design," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(4), pages 318-334, July.
    11. Hocine, Amine & Kouaissah, Noureddine, 2020. "XOR analytic hierarchy process and its application in the renewable energy sector," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    12. Omid Valizadeh & Mojtaba Ghiyasi, 2023. "Assessing telecommunication contractor firms using a hybrid DEA-BWM method," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 33(4), pages 189-200.
    13. Cortés-Aldana, Félix Antonio & García-Melón, Mónica & Fernández-de-Lucio, Ignacio & Aragonés-Beltrán, Pablo & Poveda-Bautista, Rocío, 2009. "University objectives and socioeconomic results: A multicriteria measuring of alignment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(3), pages 811-822, December.
    14. Seyed Saeed Hosseinian & Hamidreza Navidi & Abas Hajfathaliha, 2012. "A New Linear Programming Method for Weights Generation and Group Decision Making in the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 233-254, May.
    15. Lin, Ming-Ian & Lee, Yuan-Duen & Ho, Tsai-Neng, 2011. "Applying integrated DEA/AHP to evaluate the economic performance of local governments in China," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 209(2), pages 129-140, March.
    16. Archana A Mukherjee & Rajesh Kumar Singh & Ruchi Mishra & Surajit Bag, 2022. "Application of blockchain technology for sustainability development in agricultural supply chain: justification framework," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 46-61, June.
    17. Lu, Hua-An & Mao, Yun-Ru, 2015. "Evaluation of airport conditions to attract foreign low cost carriers: A case study of Taiwan," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 297-305.
    18. Burak, Selmin & Samanlioglu, Funda & Ülker, Duygu, 2022. "Evaluation of irrigation methods in Söke Plain with HF-AHP-PROMETHEE II hybrid MCDM method," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
    19. Liu, Fang & Zhang, Wei-Guo & Zhang, Li-Hua, 2014. "Consistency analysis of triangular fuzzy reciprocal preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 718-726.
    20. Mohammad Pakkar, 2015. "An integrated approach based on DEA and AHP," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 153-169, January.
    21. Chen-Yu Lin & Enmi Chung, 2015. "Evaluating the criteria of social media network users," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 1791-1802, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mup:actaun:actaun_2019067061541. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://mendelu.cz/en/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.