Employee Communication & Intranet
Interact
UK / wider Europe Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Odyssey Interactive Ltd · www.interactsoftware.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
Interact at a glance
- Vendor
- Odyssey Interactive Ltd
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Interact 2.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Interact, an AI-native intranet from Odyssey Interactive Ltd of Manchester (majority acquired in December 2025 by funds advised by Castik Capital), is strongest on integration and administration at 5-6: SCIM 2.0 provisioning from Microsoft Entra ID is documented in unusual depth, alongside SAML single sign-on and a public API reference with a changelog. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 29 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 30 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Interact, an AI-native intranet from Odyssey Interactive Ltd of Manchester (majority acquired in December 2025 by funds advised by Castik Capital), is strongest on integration and administration at 5-6: SCIM 2.0 provisioning from Microsoft Entra ID is documented in unusual depth, alongside SAML single sign-on and a public API reference with a changelog. Reach and targeting and works council and privacy sit at a uniform 4, content and knowledge at 4-5, resting on a named Data Protection Officer, a 2-month cap on retention after the service ends, a mobile app that stores no sensitive data on the device, and push notifications carrying a mandatory flag with read states. The weakest area is engagement and feedback at 3-4, where surveys, eNPS, listening and onboarding are named as capabilities but never described. The one genuine spread is sovereignty, 5 to 7: higher scores credit the published subprocessor list and storage in EU customers' chosen region; lower ones weigh US providers in the chain and the UK contracting entity. The captured pricing page states no figures; the route is booking a demo.
Speaks for it
- SCIM 2.0 provisioning from Microsoft Entra ID is documented in unusual depth — sync scopes, group types for company, department and location, a health endpoint and verbose errors.
- SAML single sign-on in the mobile app matches the web configuration, beside a public REST API reference with a changelog.
- Privacy operations are published: a named Data Protection Officer, subject-access handling with a 30-day response, and data held no longer than 2 months after the service ends.
- The subprocessor list is published with names, purposes, locations and opt-in markers, and EU customers get storage in their chosen region with in-region backups.
- Push notifications carry a mandatory flag with per-item read states, and directory groups target by company, department and location.
Held against it
- Surveys, eNPS, listening, recognition and onboarding are named as capabilities but never described — we found no public information on anonymity rules or moderation.
- We found no public information on login or provisioning for staff without a company email address; the documented flow requires Department and Location values from Entra ID.
- We found no public information on a works-agreement template, quiet hours, or whether read and usage analytics are aggregated rather than shown per person.
- The chain includes US providers — Intercom for in-app chat and Mixpanel for product analytics — and support staff in the US and UAE may access information from their country of residence.
- No price figure appears on any captured page, and the route offered is booking a demo.
Best for
- You run Microsoft Entra ID and want unusually deep, documented user and group provisioning — integration and administration scores cluster at 5-6.
- You need a mobile intranet that pushes notifications with a mandatory flag and read states to audiences defined by company, department and location.
- You are an EU customer that wants storage in your chosen region with in-region backups under binding corporate rules, and a published subprocessor list to review.
- Your privacy review looks for a named Data Protection Officer, a 2-month retention cap after the service ends, and a mobile app that stores no sensitive data on the device.
Avoid if
- Your workforce mostly sits outside a directory — the documented provisioning flow runs through Microsoft Entra ID with Department and Location as required fields, and we found no public information on provisioning people without a directory account.
- You need a fully European chain — in-app chat and product analytics run through US providers, the contracting entity states it is not established in the EU, and support staff sit in the US and UAE.
- Your works council negotiation turns on per-person read states and usage analytics — the notification system carries a mandatory flag with per-user read states, and the only published statement on analytics is that usage data is generated from content queries.
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Reach & targeted announcements | 2 of 5 |
| Pages, documents & knowledge | 2 of 5 |
| Engagement, surveys & onboarding | 2 of 5 |
| Works council, private phones & privacy by design | 2 of 5 |
| Integration, identity & administration | 3 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 3 of 5 |
Reach & targeted announcements
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How a message reaches every employee: a news feed and announcements on phone, browser and shared devices, targeting by site, department, role and language, access for staff without a company email address (invite codes, phone number, personnel number, QR codes, kiosk or shared devices), push notifications, mandatory reading with read confirmation, urgent alerts, scheduled posts, and reach analytics per message and audience.
0 — Not a communication tool; the company cannot publish news or announcements to employees in the product.
3 — A news feed or announcement channel for employees with company accounts; targeting, access without a company email address and reach figures are basic or not described.
5 — News and announcements targeted by group, site or role, delivered to a mobile app with push notifications and to the browser, employees without a company email address able to log in, and views or reach shown per post.
8 — Targeting by site, department, role and language from HR data, login documented for staff without email or company devices (personnel number, SMS code, shared devices), mandatory reading with read confirmation and reminders, urgent alerts that override quiet settings, scheduled and multi-channel posts (app, email, intranet, screens), and reach analytics per audience.
10 — Reach that can be proved: delivery and reading tracked per channel against the whole workforce, offline access and low-bandwidth delivery documented, crisis messages with acknowledgement and escalation, aggregated reports exportable, and the reach analytics described with the data they use.
The Internal Communications Lead
The homepage names a frontline app, multi-language communications, email and personalization that adapts to each employee based on their role, location, needs and priorities, and directory groups for company, department and location give me a real audience structure; the mobile app carries push notifications and the notification model includes a mandatory flag with a read state. I found no public information on how shop-floor staff without a company email address or device log in, on read confirmations with reminders, urgent alerts, or reach figures per message and audience — the first things I need before sending a safety notice to a night shift. 1 9 10 18
The Frontline Operations Lead
The vendor promises an intranet that adapts to each employee by role, location, needs and priorities, the mobile app carries push notifications, and the notification system has both a read state and a mandatory flag — so targeted, mandatory reading exists at the technical level. What decides it for my pickers and drivers — how someone without a company email address or a company device gets in on day one — goes no further: we found no public information on invite codes, personnel numbers, QR codes or shared devices, and no per-post reach figures. 1 9 10
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
Targeting is described as the intranet adapting to each employee by role and location, with multi-language comms and a frontline app named as capabilities, and the mobile app receives push notifications; the notification API even carries a mandatory flag. We found no public information on login for staff without a company email address, urgent alerts overriding quiet settings, scheduled posts, or reach figures per post and audience, so this sits just above the basic level. 1 9 10
The Works Council Member
There is an intranet with a mobile app that receives push notifications and mirrors the web login, content is personalised by role and location, and the notification system carries a mandatory flag with per-item read states — which is precisely the point where I ask who besides the employee can see that read state, and the answer is not published. We found no public information on access for staff without a company email address, shared devices, urgent alerts, scheduled posts, or reach figures per post and audience. 1 9 10
The Data Protection Officer
A mobile app with push notifications and a notification system that tracks mandatory and read status per user is documented, and the homepage names a frontline app plus personalisation by role and location; we found no public information on reaching staff without a company email address, urgent alerts, scheduled posts or per-post reach figures. 1 9 10
The Skeptic
The developer pages document a genuine notification service — push in the mobile app, a mandatory flag on notifications, read and unread states — and provisioning groups by company, department and location give targeting hooks. We found no public information on login for staff without a company email address, urgent alerts overriding quiet settings, scheduled posts, or per-post reach figures. 1 9 10 18
Pages, documents & knowledge
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What employees can look up: intranet pages and a content management system, documents and policies with versions and owners, search across content and connected systems, a people directory and org chart, multilingual content with machine translation of posts and pages, content review and expiry, and access from the app as well as the browser.
0 — No pages or documents; the product carries only messages that scroll away.
3 — Files or simple pages can be shared; search, translation, a people directory and content governance are basic or not described.
5 — Pages and a document area with permissions, search across the content, a people directory, content available in the mobile app, and posts or pages translatable into several languages.
8 — A content management system with templates, page ownership, review dates and versioning, search across connected systems (SharePoint, Google Drive or similar), automatic translation of posts, pages and comments into named languages, an org chart from HR data, and pages readable offline.
10 — Knowledge that stays current: content lifecycle and expiry enforced, search and AI answers that cite their sources and respect permissions, analytics on what is searched and not found, accessibility of the content stated against WCAG, and a full export of pages and documents.
The Internal Communications Lead
Pages, content items, assets and galleries are documented through the content API, search is named as a capability and backed by AI embeddings for internal semantic search, multilingual communications are listed and the content API carries a language parameter, and everything reaches the mobile app. I found no public information on a people directory, page permissions, versioning, review dates or offline reading, so I cannot confirm the content governance my policies require. 1 8 9 12
The Frontline Operations Lead
Content management, knowledge base, search and multi-language comms are named capabilities, the content API exposes pages, galleries and assets with a language parameter, and semantic search runs through a named AI-embeddings sub-processor. We found no public information on versioning, review dates, page permissions, a people directory or an org chart, and the mobile documentation states all data loads live from the API — we found no public information on offline reading for a warehouse aisle with no signal. 1 8 9 12
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
The developer documentation shows a real content model — pages, sections, content items, galleries, assets and sites, each with authors — and search, knowledge base and content management are named capabilities, with the mobile app reaching the intranet. We found no public information on a people directory, permissions on a document area, translation of pages and posts, or versioning and review dates, which keeps this between the basic and mid level. 1 9 12
The Works Council Member
Content management, knowledge base and search are named capabilities, pages, galleries and assets sit in the public API, multilingual communications are offered, and an opt-in AI-embeddings service powers internal semantic search, with everything reachable in the mobile app. We found no public information on a people directory or org chart, document permissions, or page ownership and versioning in the captured material. 1 8 9 12
The Data Protection Officer
The developer documentation evidences a real content system of pages, sites, galleries and assets with per-endpoint access levels and a language parameter, alongside named capabilities for knowledge base, search and content management; we found no public information on a people directory, content versioning and review dates, offline reading, or which languages machine translation covers. 1 9 12
The Skeptic
Pages, sites, galleries and assets are documented through the content API with site-admin-gated endpoints, content management, search and multi-language comms are named capabilities, and the mobile app serves the same intranet. We found no public information on versioning, review dates, a people directory, or machine translation into named languages. 1 9 12
Engagement, surveys & onboarding
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the workforce answers back and gets started: comments, reactions and moderation, employee surveys and pulse checks with anonymity rules, recognition, user-generated posts and communities, onboarding journeys for new starters including those without a desk, event and campaign pages, and the measures the vendor offers to report engagement.
0 — One-way only; employees cannot react, comment or answer in the product.
3 — Likes and comments on posts; surveys, moderation and onboarding are basic or not described.
5 — Comments and reactions with moderation, surveys or polls sent to targeted groups with results shown, employee posts or communities, and an onboarding area or journey for new employees.
8 — Pulse and engagement surveys with a stated anonymity threshold, automated onboarding journeys timed from the start date and reaching new starters before their first shift, recognition, communities with moderation rules, and engagement reported per group without exposing individuals.
10 — Listening that leads to action: survey results tied to follow-up tasks and published back to the workforce, anonymity and minimum group sizes documented, onboarding journeys measured by completion, and engagement data exportable for analysis.
The Internal Communications Lead
Likes and comments are real — the content API returns counts for both — and recognition, eNPS, listening and onboarding are all listed as capabilities. Beyond those names I found no public information on survey anonymity rules, moderation, communities, or onboarding journeys timed from the start date for people who never sit at a desk. 1 12
The Frontline Operations Lead
Like and comment counts sit in the API, and the homepage names Onboarding, eNPS, Listening and Recognition as capabilities, which is more than a bare like-and-comment feed. But that is where the public evidence stops: we found no public information on how an onboarding journey is timed to a start date or reaches a seasonal starter before their first shift, on survey anonymity rules, or on moderation. 1 12
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
Likes and comments are evidenced in the content API's response fields, and the homepage lists onboarding, eNPS, listening and recognition as capabilities. Beyond those names we found no public information on anonymity rules for surveys, moderation, when onboarding journeys reach new starters, or engagement reporting per group, so it stays just above the basic level. 1 12
The Works Council Member
Comments and likes are evidenced in the content API, onboarding, recognition, eNPS and listening are named capabilities backed by a wholly-owned listening subsidiary, and survey and rewards pages were captured. Before any survey goes live in our stores I need the anonymity rules, and the captured material states no anonymity threshold, minimum group size, survey targeting or moderation rules anywhere. 1 8 12
The Data Protection Officer
Likes and comments are evidenced in the content API response fields, and surveys, eNPS, listening, recognition and onboarding are named as capabilities with dedicated pages captured, but nothing about them is described; we found no public information on anonymity rules, moderation or how onboarding journeys are timed. 1 12
The Skeptic
Like and comment counts appear in the API responses, so two-way engagement is real, and surveys, eNPS, listening, onboarding and recognition are all named as capabilities. None is described beyond the label — we found no public information on anonymity rules, moderation, or how onboarding journeys are timed and measured. 1 12
Works council, private phones & privacy by design
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the product can be rolled out under German co-determination and data protection: guidance or a template for a works agreement (Betriebsvereinbarung, § 87 BetrVG), no individual performance or behaviour monitoring by default, read and usage analytics aggregated or configurable, use on private phones without a company device (BYOD) with work and private data separated, quiet hours and availability settings, voluntary use without an employee email address, data minimisation and deletion, and accessibility.
0 — Built to monitor the behaviour or performance of individual employees, with that monitoring sold as a feature.
3 — A general GDPR statement; works council, use on private phones, analytics on individuals and quiet hours are basic or not described.
5 — Use on private phones described with what the employer can and cannot see, analytics shown in aggregate, notification or quiet-hour settings, and works councils or employee representatives named as a topic with information offered.
8 — A works-agreement template or checklist published, individual tracking off by default or switchable per tenant, read confirmations limited to messages that require them, quiet hours enforced, a login without a private email or phone number, data minimisation and deletion periods stated, and accessibility to WCAG or BITV stated.
10 — Co-determination built into the product: every analytics view and its granularity documented for the works council, configuration logged, employee-facing privacy notices in the app, minimum group sizes for every report, and published references of works-council-approved rollouts.
The Internal Communications Lead
The privacy material is more than boilerplate: a named Data Protection Officer, a data processing agreement available on request, subject-access handling, deletion within two months of service end, storage in the employer's chosen region, and a mobile app that stores no sensitive data on the device and encrypts its access token. For my works council, though, I found no public information on a works-agreement template or checklist, aggregate-only analytics, quiet hours, or a login without a private email or phone number — precisely the points co-determination turns on. 6 9 15
The Frontline Operations Lead
There is a dedicated GDPR page covering controller and processor roles, subject-access handling and a data processing agreement available on request, retention is capped at 2 months after the service ends, and the mobile documentation states no sensitive data is stored on the device, with biometric login offered. We found no public information on works councils or works-agreement templates, quiet hours, or whether usage analytics are aggregated rather than shown per person — the first questions my works council will put to me. 6 9 15
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
Privacy operations are genuinely documented: a named DPO, an EU representative in Dublin, a data processing agreement on request, binding corporate rules, breach notification and a hard two-month cap on holding data after the service ends. For the co-determination side — a works agreement template, quiet hours, separation of work and private data on personal phones, aggregate-only analytics and accessibility statements — we found no public information, which caps this in the lower middle. 6 15
The Works Council Member
The mobile documentation is what I check for private phones: no sensitive data stored on the device, the access token device-encrypted, and the policy states data is kept no longer than two months after the service ends with the employer as controller and a data processing agreement available on request. What I could not find is anything on works councils or a works-agreement template, quiet hours, or whether read and usage analytics are aggregated — the notification system carries a mandatory flag and read states, and the only statement on analytics is that usage data is generated from content queries, with nothing on who may see it per person. That is not a package I could take into a section 87 negotiation without further documents. 6 9 10 15
The Data Protection Officer
The GDPR page is substantive — controller and processor roles, a named DPO, subject-access handling with a 30-day response, a data processing agreement on request, staff training and a two-month retention cap after service ends — and the mobile app on a private phone stores no sensitive data on the device with an encrypted access token; we found no public information on works-council guidance or a works-agreement template, quiet hours, or how read and usage analytics are aggregated. 6 9 15
The Skeptic
There is a named Data Protection Officer, a two-month cap on retention after the service ends, subject-access handling, and a mobile app that stores nothing sensitive beyond an encrypted token and recent searches — sound hygiene for private phones. For the works-council questions — aggregate-only analytics, quiet hours, a works-agreement template, accessibility against WCAG — we found no public information. 6 9 15
Integration, identity & administration
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the product fits the company's systems and is run: Microsoft 365, SharePoint, Teams and Google Workspace integration, user provisioning from the HR system or directory (Entra ID, SAP SuccessFactors, Personio, Workday), single sign-on and SCIM, roles and admin rights by site or department, an API and webhooks, integrations with shift planning and payroll for frontline links, white-label apps, and an export of content and users when leaving.
0 — Stand-alone with manual user lists and no integration of any kind.
3 — Users imported from a file and a few links to other tools; single sign-on, provisioning and an API are basic or not described.
5 — Single sign-on with named identity providers, users provisioned from a directory or HR system, Microsoft 365 or Google Workspace integration, several named integrations, and a documented API.
8 — Automated provisioning by SCIM or HR connector including staff without email, delegated administration by site or department, integration in Microsoft Teams and SharePoint, connectors for named HR, shift and payroll systems, webhooks, a white-label app option, and an audit log.
10 — Runs as part of the company's systems: a public developer platform with versioned API and SDKs, every integration documented, a status page and stated SLA, and a full export of content, users and analytics that a successor system can import.
The Internal Communications Lead
SCIM 2.0 provisioning from Microsoft Entra ID is documented in unusual depth — user and group sync with department and location as required fields, manager reconciliation, a service health endpoint — and SAML single sign-on plus a documented REST API with a reference and changelog round it out. I found no public information on embedding inside Microsoft Teams, webhooks, delegated administration by site or department, an audit log or a white-label app, which is what a rollout across eleven sites would ask of it. 9 10 12 18
The Frontline Operations Lead
SCIM 2.0 provisioning from Microsoft Entra ID is documented in unusual depth — create, update and delete events, groups mapped to company, department and location, a health endpoint, even the known failure modes — next to SAML single sign-on and a REST API with a public reference and changelog. For a workforce that mostly sits nowhere near a directory account this reads as desk-staff plumbing: the documented flow requires Department and Location values from Entra ID, and we found no public information on provisioning people without a directory account or on connectors to shift planning and payroll. 9 12 18
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
SCIM 2.0 provisioning from Entra ID is documented to unusual depth — tenant URL, secret token, group mappings for company, department and location, manager reconciliation, plus honest notes on the 30-day soft-delete gap and nested-group limits — alongside SAML sign-on and a real REST API with a reference, changelog and access levels, one endpoint gated to site admins. For the app inside Teams, SharePoint embedding, provisioning staff without email, webhooks, an audit log and an export of content and users at contract end we found no public information. That identity and API depth is real, but the gaps that matter to my environment are just as real. 18 9 12 10
The Works Council Member
The provisioning story is unusually public and detailed: real-time SCIM 2.0 user and group provisioning from Microsoft Entra ID with department and location as required fields, SAML single sign-on that the mobile app matches, and a public API reference with a changelog and site-admin access levels. We found no public information on an audit log, webhooks, a white-label app, or connectors to HR, shift planning and payroll systems, and the documented limits — no nested groups, disabled users unsupported — are things I would want on the table before signing. 9 12 18
The Data Protection Officer
SCIM 2.0 provisioning from Microsoft Entra ID is documented in unusual depth — create, update and delete events, group types mapped to company, department and location, manager sync and a health endpoint — with SAML single sign-on and a public API reference with a changelog; we found no public information on Microsoft Teams or SharePoint integration details, webhooks, an audit log or a white-label app option. 9 12 18
The Skeptic
SCIM 2.0 provisioning from Microsoft Entra ID is documented to unusual depth — sync scopes, group types, soft-delete delays, a health endpoint, verbose errors — alongside SAML in the mobile app and a public API reference with a changelog. We found no public information on webhooks, an audit log, delegated administration by department, or connectors to HR, shift and payroll systems. 9 12 18
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Who the contracting entity and the parent company are, where employee profiles, messages, files and usage data are hosted, and who the subprocessors are (hosting, push notifications, email and SMS delivery, video, translation, AI models, analytics, support). Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; an employee app holds data on the whole workforce, often on private phones, so the whole chain counts, not only the database.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and no data processing agreement offered.
3 — A privacy policy and a data processing agreement exist, but hosting location is unstated or non-EU and the subprocessors are not listed.
5 — EU hosting available and an EU contracting entity or EU representative, but parts of the chain (push delivery, translation, AI, email, analytics, support) run through non-EU providers without a stated safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessors listed with their locations, a data processing agreement published, and security certifications (ISO 27001, SOC 2) stated.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: European ownership, entity, hosting and every subprocessor, or self-hosting on the customer's own servers, data export and deletion documented, and certifications published with their scope rather than implied.
The Internal Communications Lead
The subprocessor list is published with names, purposes, locations and opt-in flags — AWS EMEA for UK/EU hosting alongside US providers such as Intercom, Mixpanel and Voyage AI — and EU customers get storage in their chosen region with in-region backups, binding corporate rules as the transfer mechanism, and ISO 27001 plus SOC 2 Type II stated. But the contracting entity is Odyssey Interactive Ltd, which itself states it is not established in the European Union and relies on a Dublin representative, the data processing agreement is only on request, and support staff in the US and UAE may access information — enough transparency to weigh the chain, not a sovereign chain end to end. 1 6 8 15
The Frontline Operations Lead
The contracting entity is the UK company Odyssey Interactive Ltd with an Article 27 representative in Dublin, EU customers' data, backups and redundancy sites stay in the chosen region under binding corporate rules, and a sub-processor list is published with locations alongside ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II. But the chain includes US providers — AWS US, Intercom for chat, Mixpanel for analytics, Voyage AI for search embeddings, Twilio for text — and support staff are based in the US and UAE, so the European story is real but not end-to-end. 1 6 8 15
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
The subprocessor list is published with purpose, location and opt-in flags — AWS EMEA for UK/EU hosting, Twilio, Mux, Voyage AI and Intercom in the US — and EU customers get a stated commitment to no transfers out of their chosen region with backups and redundancy in-region, plus ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and SOC 2 Type II. But the contracting entity is UK-based and states it is not established in the EU, the data processing agreement is available on request rather than published, and support staff in the US and UAE may access data, so the chain is not European end to end. 8 6 15 1
The Works Council Member
Odyssey Interactive is a United Kingdom company that states it is not established in the EU and has appointed an Article 27 representative in Dublin; EU customers get a no-transfers-out-of-region commitment with backups and redundancy in-region on named AWS infrastructure, and the subprocessor list is published with locations. The chain still runs through US providers — Mixpanel for product analytics, Intercom for in-app chat, opt-in US services for video and AI embeddings — and support staff sit in the UAE and US; ISO 27001:2022 and a SOC 2 Type II report are stated, but the data processing agreement is available on request rather than published. 1 6 8 15
The Data Protection Officer
Subprocessors are published with locations and opt-in gating for the AI, video and text-message providers, EU-customer hosting stays in the chosen region including backups, binding corporate rules are the stated transfer mechanism, and ISO/IEC 27001:2022, SOC 2 Type II and Cyber Essentials are stated; but the contracting entity is a UK company outside the EU served by an Article 27 representative, US providers sit in the default chain for in-app chat and product analytics, and support staff in the US and UAE may access information from their country of residence. 1 6 8 15
The Skeptic
The subprocessor list is published with locations and EU customers get hosting locked to their chosen region with backups in-region, but in-app chat and email run through Intercom in the US, product analytics through Mixpanel in the US, AI embeddings through Voyage AI in the US, and support staff sit in the US and UAE. The contracting entity is the UK's Odyssey Interactive, which appointed a Dublin representative precisely because it is not established in the EU, and the processing agreement comes on request rather than published. 1 6 8 15
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per user or per employee, whether frontline and desk staff are priced differently, platform or base fee, which modules (intranet, employee email, surveys, translation, AI, a white-label app) cost extra, minimum seats and term, and setup and onboarding fees.
0 — No public prices at all; every customer is a sales call.
3 — A starting price or a free tier exists, but how cost scales with users, modules or a branded app is unclear.
5 — Tiers are public with their per-user or base price and main inclusions, but at least one commonly needed piece (frontline users, translation, a branded app, extra modules) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its scaling rule (per user, per frontline user, per active user), add-ons and a branded app priced, minimum seats and term, setup fees and VAT treatment stated.
10 — Complete price computability: annual cost derivable for a given headcount and module set, with every add-on, setup, support and branded-app fee and the cancellation and data-return terms published.
The Internal Communications Lead
A pricing page exists and is linked from the homepage, but the captured pages state no figures at all — no per-user or per-employee price, no tier inclusions, no differentiation between desk and frontline staff, no seat minimums, term or setup fees — and the route offered is booking a demo. For three thousand people across eleven sites I cannot begin to compute an annual cost from what is published. 1 5 11
The Frontline Operations Lead
A pricing page is linked from the homepage, but no price figure, tier, per-user rate or seasonal-staff rate appears in anything we captured; the only buying step described is booking a demo. For 1,800 mostly temporary staff I cannot compute even a rough annual cost from the public material we read. 1 5 11
The Microsoft 365 Administrator
A pricing page is linked from the homepage, but we found no price figures on any captured page, and the route offered is booking a demo. Nothing captured shows per-user or per-employee pricing, module add-ons, minimum seats, term or setup fees, so a buyer can compute nothing from the public material. 1 11
The Works Council Member
A pricing page exists and is linked, but its captured text speaks of seven employee-experience pillars and states no figures, and the route offered is booking a demo. We found no public information on per-user or per-frontline-user prices, a platform fee, module or branded-app costs, minimum seats, term, or setup fees, so no annual cost can be computed for our headcount from what is published. 1 5 11
The Data Protection Officer
The homepage links a pricing page and offers demo booking, but no price figure of any kind appears in the captured pages — no per-user price, tier or fee — so no part of the annual cost is computable from public information. 1 5 11
The Skeptic
A pricing page exists, but what was captured from it markets seven employee-experience pillars with no figures attached, no prices are stated on the homepage, and the entry point is 'Book a demo'. We found no public information on per-user pricing, frontline rates, module costs, minimum seats, term or setup fees, so no annual cost can be computed. 1 5 11
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 6 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting location | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Hosting options | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Open source | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data processing agreement | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Transfer impact assessment | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Interact
Is Interact European?
Yes, though not from the EU. whats-best.ai classifies Interact as UK / wider Europe.
Where does Interact store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026.
Does Interact have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 29 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Interact?
As of 3 Nov 2026, the panel rates Flip (3.5/5), Workvivo by Zoom (3/5) and Staffbase (3/5) highest among the other 17 Employee Communication & Intranet products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Flip (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Interact alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 29 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Data processing agreement. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 63 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 6 compliance facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 integrations fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 pricing fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (18)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Features page (mobile intranet) www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Features page (analytics) www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Features page (translation) www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Pricing page www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Privacy policy www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Security / trust page www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Subprocessor list www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Reach & targeted announcements — found from sitemap developer.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Reach & targeted announcements — found from sitemap developer.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Pages, documents & knowledge — found from sitemap www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Pages, documents & knowledge — found from sitemap developer.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Engagement, surveys & onboarding — found from sitemap www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 Engagement, surveys & onboarding — found from sitemap www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 15 Works council, private phones & privacy by design — found from sitemap www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 16 Works council, private phones & privacy by design — found from sitemap www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 17 Integration, identity & administration — found from sitemap www.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →
- 18 Integration, identity & administration — found from sitemap developer.interactsoftware.com Checked 29 Oct 2026 Details →