If you’re looking for alternatives to Mitel for enterprise telephony that’s truly tailored to your sales teams or in-house call centers, this Top 6 Mitel alternatives is designed for your context. The comparison focuses on real-world use, to help you make an informed B2B choice based on your operational needs, not on a simple list of features.
No credit card
No obligation
Custom demo
The solutions below were compared on the basis of their suitability for real-life business telephony applications, team productivity and operational flexibility.
| Solution | Best for | Key features | Price positioning | Score out of 10 |
| Kavkom | Performance-oriented sales teams and in-house call centers | Dialer, supervision, CRM integration, call reporting | Flexible, no-commitment, long-term model | 9 |
| RingCentral | Multi-usage for small and medium-sized businesses and large enterprises | Cloud telephony, collaboration, contact center, supervision | Subscriptions by functional level | 7,5 |
| Mitel | Organizations already equipped with telecom infrastructures | Enterprise telephony, routing, supervision | Structured model, upgradeable with options | 6,5 |
| Twilio | Customized product and technical teams | Voice APIs, automation, custom integrations | Pay-per-use, variable costs | 6 |
| Plivo | Technical use cases and specific projects | Telephony API, call automation, reporting | Consumption logic | 6 |
| Vonage | Businesses looking for combined telephony and APIs | Cloud telephony, contact center, integrations | Mixed subscription and usage model | 6,5 |
| Dialpad | Collaboration and support teams | Cloud telephony, conversational AI, supervision | Subscriptions per user | 6,5 |
Kavkom is designed for teams looking for directly usable business telephony, focused on real use, day-to-day productivity and flexibility adapted to business changes, without unnecessary complexity.
Kavkom is the right choice for companies that want enterprise cloud telephony simple to deploy, designed for sales teams or call centers equipped in-house (Kavkom provides the tool, not an outsourcing service). Typically, an SME or ETI with a sedentary sales team, regular outgoing calls, and a clear need for day-to-day management, without depending on an IT team.
Kavkom focuses on the key functionalities required for sales performance and team management: native predictive dialer, call campaigns, real-time supervision, agent coaching, advanced statistics and CRM integration, with no essential modules to add to get started.
The pricing logic is clear and scalablewith a commitment-free commitment-free and a pro rata billing. This makes it easy to adjust the number of users according to actual activity, without any structural overhead when the team grows or shrinks.
Kavkom makes a choice of specialization on sales performance and corporate telephony. For highly complex, heavy omnichannel or ultra-personalized environments for thousands of agents, this is not the most appropriate tool.
Kavkom precisely meets the key criteria of the table when the objective is operational efficiency. The solution remains simple, directly usable by teams, with a clear balance between productivity, supervision and flexibilitywithout weighing down the user experience.
Score : 9 / 10
RingCentral is ideal for companies that are already structured, often SMEs or large organizations, and are looking to centralize telephony, collaboration and contact center within a single platform. IT and operations teams benefit from a rich, highly integrated environment.
The platform covers a broad spectrum, beyond just telephony.
The model is based on subscriptions per user, with functional tiers. Costs rise rapidly when needs go beyond basic telephony, and readability is highly dependent on the plan chosen.
For sales teams who want to move fast, the functional complexity can become an obstacle. The solution is powerful, but sometimes too broad for a use focused on calling and selling.
Score : 7.5 / 10
Five9 is designed for large contact centers with high call volumes, often multi-site and international. Customer service and IT departments find it a robust tool for managing complex operations.
Its use is clearly oriented towards advanced contact centers.
Pricing is structured by modules and agent profiles, often with a commitment. Costs are coherent for large volumes, but not well suited to gradually growing teams.
For an SME or a traditional sales team, Five9 is oversized. Setting up and managing the system takes time and internal resources.
Score : 7 / 10
Vocalcom is designed for companies running in-house call centers with strong compliance and omnichannel requirements. It is often found in regulated or high-volume sectors.
The solution is focused on control and quality.
The model is flexible in form, but still complex to read without guidance. Cost trends are highly dependent on the options activated and the volume processed.
For mainly commercial use, the platform can appear cumbersome. It takes some getting used to, especially for teams with few initial tools.
Score : 7 / 10
Talkdesk is designed for companies focused on omnichannel customer experienceThis is often the case for companies of a certain size and above. Customer service and operations managers benefit from a modern, highly automated platform.
Usage relies heavily on AI and omnichannel.
Pricing is per user, with several levels. Advanced functionalities are quickly made conditional on higher-level plans, which has an impact on budget clarity.
For sales teams who want to call, follow up and convert, Talkdesk can be overly focused on advanced customer relations and less direct.
Rating: 6.5 / 10
Vonage is ideal for businesses that want to combine corporate telephony and API-based communicationsoften with specific integration needs. Technical and product teams are given a great deal of freedom.
The platform is broad and modular.
The pricing logic varies according to usage, between subscriptions and consumption. This offers flexibility, but makes it more difficult to anticipate costs.
For non-technical sales teams, Vonage often requires in-house support or in-house skills to exploit its full potential.
Rating: 6.5 / 10
Not all solutions meet the same needs.
Incoming, outgoing, or a mix of both.
We need to distinguish between simple use and managerial control.
This is a key criterion for organizations on the move.
These two solutions don’t address the same realities in the field. The choice depends above all on your day-to-day usage, the way your teams work, and what you really want from your telephony.
Is your telephony a simple communication tool or a daily operational lever?
If telephony is primarily used to structure sales activity, track calls and adjust actions on a day-to-day basis, an operational-use-oriented approach makes sense. Conversely, if telephony is part of a more institutional, historical environment, the logic is not the same.
Do you need to manage calls and teams in real time?
Some organizations are looking for stability and continuity. Others need immediate visibility, supervision and simple management to support their teams throughout the day. The expected level of control clearly changes the decision.
Are you looking for a turnkey solution or are you comfortable with a more IT-oriented environment?
When the objective is to move quickly, without relying on heavy configuration or in-house technical expertise, a solution designed to be up and running quickly is the natural choice. Conversely, more complex environments require more structured implementation.
Is contractual flexibility important to your business?
If your organization is evolving, with varying staff numbers or volumes, the ability to easily adjust the tool becomes a real criterion. In more stable contexts, this flexibility weighs less in the balance.
Do your teams work under pressure with volume or performance targets?
When sales performance is at the heart of the business, telephony must support the rhythm, not slow it down. For other, more institutional or administrative uses, this requirement is less central.
In practice, the right choice depends on the alignment between your way of working and the solution’s philosophy. For teams who want directly usable, action-oriented and operationally-driven corporate telephony, Kavkom fits in with a coherent, rational logic, whereas Mitel is more suited to more traditional, structured environments.
Find out why over 8,000 companies work with Kavkom for their corporate telephony.
4.7 on Capterra
With Kavkom, I was able to easily resolve the issue of communication costs to my regular customers. My agents, too, were no longer restricted in their mobility, because even when on the move, communications are managed.
Ben Cauchois
VP Sales & Operations @ SEIZA
We’ve increased our targets by 10% thanks to the information we’ve gained from call identification and analysis provided by Kavkom’s telephony solution.
Dov Dahan
CEO @ Formideo
We evaluated several service providers, and Kavkom emerged as the only option that allowed us to tailor our customer service requirements to our unique business practices.
Pierre Roche
Managing Partner
at Groupe OREL
The integration of Kavkom’s virtual number service with voicemail has considerably facilitated our process of collecting visitor testimonials. We have been able to gather valuable feedback that helps us to continually improve our services.
Hélène Lafont-Couturier
Visitor Relations Manager
Musée des Confluences
Any other questions?
Consult our Online Help or Contact us
Which Mitel alternative is best for B2B companies?
There is no universal answer. The right choice depends on team typeSome companies prefer a structuring platform, others a solution geared to day-to-day use. Some companies prefer a structuring platform, others a solution geared to everyday use. The important thing is to align the tool with operational reality.
Which alternatives are best suited to sales teams?
Sales teams especially needoutbound callsand simple management. Solutions designed for performance in the field facilitate the pace and visibility of management. In this context, tools such as Kavkom can be coherent when telephony is a direct lever for performance.
Are these alternatives suitable for call centers?
Yes, but not all in the same way. Visit in-house call centers with high volumes and routing requirements have different needs from lighter customer support. Some platforms are designed for intensive management, others for smaller teams. The expected level of supervision is decisive.
Are there more flexible alternatives to Mitel in terms of commitment?
Some solutions focus on contractual flexibility to adapt to changes in teams and business. This can be an advantage for growing organizations or those with variable volumes. Other tools prefer more stable frameworks, better suited to already fixed structures.
How do you compare the real costs of different alternatives?
We need to look beyond the entry-level and analyze the overall economic logic. Necessary options, dependence on usage and evolution with growth can strongly influence cost over time. A solution that’s easy to understand today may become more complex to manage tomorrow if the business changes.
