ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION · 2020-05-02 · 4 ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION other criteria. So we can say definitively that

KEY QUESTIONS:

What unique usability and digital transformation barriers to middle market companies face, and how can they be surmounted?

9

How does enterprise software usability impact readiness for digital transformation?

5

Would senior employees change jobs due to poor software usability?

7

KEY QUESTIONS:

ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION

HOW USABILITY CONNECTS PEOPLE AND PROCESSES IN INDUSTRIAL SETTINGS FOR ENHANCED AGILITY

IFS PRIMARY RESEARCH REPORT Charles Rathmann, Senior Marketing Communications Analyst, North America, IFS, October 2017

CONTENT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................... 3

KEY FINDING 1: ............................................................................. 5ERP Means Excel Runs Production ................................................. 5

KEY FINDING 2: ............................................................................. 7The Digital Transformation-Usability Connection ............................. 7

KEY FINDING #3 ............................................................................ 9Poor Usability Can Affect Personnel Retention ............................... 9

KEY FINDING #4 .......................................................................... 10Middle Market Challenges to Usability ......................................... 10

KEY FINDING #5 .......................................................................... 12Poor Usability May Be a Barrier to Servitization ........................... 12

METHODOLOGY ........................................................................... 14

RESULTS ..................................................................................... 15

ABOUT IFS .................................................................................. 19

3 ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION

ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATIONBY CHARLES RATHMANN SENIOR MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS ANALYST,

NORTH AMERICA, IFS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARYDigital Transformation may be defined in a number of different ways by analysts or enterprise software vendors. But at its heart is the idea that as we use more digital technologies, those technologies change the way we live and, more pointedly, the way we conduct commerce and do business. Businesses are introducing new technologies in innovative ways to reduce cost, create new revenue opportunities and improve the customer experience.

In complex industrial settings like those served by IFS, digital transformation can be challenging. While retail has been transformed through e-commerce and transportation transformed by services like Lyft and Uber, an engineer-to-order manufacturer, asset-intensive business or complex field service operation may have to apply technology very differently in order to realize transformational change.

In this study of industrial executives in North America, we will look how enterprise software usability affects the ability of these industrial organizations to digitally transform their operation. Usability itself may be hard to define, but may encompass:

• The degree to which the software is intuitive, so that with basic training end-users can perform day-to-day business functions.

• The degree to which enterprise software includes functionality that meets the core needs of the business.

• Whether or not different modules of enterprise software share the same navigational or functional conventions. Enterprise resource planning (ERP) suites made up of acquired products or white-labeled products from other software vendors may present usability challenges for those accessing more than a single part of the overall solution.

• To what extent the software is easily configurable. As the business environ-ment and enterprise needs change, enterprise software must be able to change with the business. Software lacking configurability, or requiring extensive consulting or programming to effect changes, may be an impedi-ment to, rather than a help in, digital transformation.

In this study, IFS found that software usability and a perceived readiness for digital transformation were closely linked. Respondents were asked to what extent their enterprise software prepared them for digital transformation, and their answer to this question had a stronger correlation to either high or low ratings of enterprise software usability than did company size, industry, age of the respondent, the type of enterprise software used, vertical industry or

IFS found that software usability and a perceived readiness for digital transformation were closely linked. Respondents were asked to what extent their enterprise software prepared them for digital transformation, and their answer to this question had a stronger correlation to either high or low ratings of enterprise software usability than did company size, industry, age of the respondent, the type of enterprise software used, vertical industry or other criteria.


other criteria. So we can say definitively that enterprise software usability is a key component in preparing for digital transformation.

This may be because, as stated, the ability to change and reconfigure an enterprise software system may be a key component in usability. But if enter-prise software is hard to use or does not contain appropriate functionality, end users will rely on systems outside of the enterprise software. This creates exactly the type of data silos and disconnected processes that enter-prise software is designed to eliminate, which makes changing the organiza-tion in a structured and organized fashion all the more difficult.

This study encompasses usability of enterprise resource planning (ERP), enterprise asset management (EAM), field service management (FSM), customer relationship management (CRM) and supply chain management (SCM) software.

“Traditionally, enterprise software has been all about structure. It is very defined. It is very rigorous. It does things in a predefined way, and this enables managerial control and visibility. But the real world does not work that way. The world is in a rapid state of change—digital transformation—and business is now online and dynamic. Excel is the ultimate agile system, but it is very unstructured. To facilitate digital transformation in these industrial settings, enterprise software must find a middle ground between the old school, top-down control and the ‘chaos rules’ approach of Excel. Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer, North America, IFS

An enterprise system must be agile enough to meet the demands of digital transformation while preserving governance and control of data.


KEY FINDING 1:Lacking Usability, ERP Stands for Excel Runs ProductionPoor usability will often drive users to abandon enterprise software, including ERP, in favor of desktop and web-based software applications, primarily Microsoft® Excel®.

In situations where enterprise software usability was poor, a sizable majority of respondents—88 percent—said they would be likely to use spreadsheets, with 84 percent citing Microsoft Excel.

Excel was most popular among 18-35-year-olds, with 95 percent citing the popular spreadsheet product as a workaround when enterprise software presented usability difficulties. This may be because this age cohort would have had extensive exposure to Excel in university business school settings, and would perhaps lean on these skills in their day-to-day work.

Excel Runs ProductionPC-based an Web-based Workarounds

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Microsoft Excel

Corporate Email

Microsoft Project

Microsoft Access

Share point

Dropbox

Google Docs

Google Sites

Google Sheets

Google Cloud Connect

IBM Notes/Domino formerly Lotus Notes

Facebook Messenger

Yahoo Messenger

MSN Messenger

Other

None

Managing business process in spreadsheets reduces visibility, gover-nance and control. So it is imperative that companies specifying or evaluat-ing enterprise software pay attention to usability. Lacking usability, including the ability to adapt the software to business processes as they evolve, will mean users will take the easy way out and rely on products like Excel. The software must include agile data visualization tools or, again, users will find other ways to get the information they need outside the system, resulting in disconnected processes and data silos. And if a virus attack like WannaCry affects your business, how would you recover if unprotected, distributed spreadsheets are locked up, bringing your business to its knees? For a num-ber of reasons, businesses where Excel runs production will experience a higher risk profile than those with agile, effective enterprise systems.

For a number of reasons, businesses where Excel runs production will experience a higher risk profile than those with agile, effective enterprise systems.

When enterprise data is kept in spreadsheets, revision control becomes an issue, and files containing proprietary data are often emailed back and forth, resulting in a loss of control and security. An enterprise system must be agile enough to meet the demands of digital transformation while preserving governance and control of data.” Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer, North America, IFS


Excel Runs Production by Age100%

95%

90%

85%

80%

75%

70%18 to 35 years old

Microsoft Excel36 to 45 years old 46 to 55 years old 56 years old or

older


KEY FINDING 2:Digital Transformation and Usability Are Inextricably LinkedUsable systems engage people. A consumer application like Facebook is sticky to the point where it is hard for many of us to stay off of it, and once we are on, we can lose track of time. The data resulting from the engage-ments we have with Facebook can be analyzed, monetized and sold to those who want these types of consumer insights. Enterprise software usability works much the same way in that data is placed in the system by engaged users, and this data enables intelligent management of the business, driving business intelligence and operational intelligence tools.

Lacking this engagement, even a firm mandate from senior management to use a system of record will not be very successful in ensuring that infor-mation critical to the enterprise winds up in a central repository used to make C-level and board-level decisions. The resulting lack of enterprise visibility, as information winds up in various unconnected silos beyond the visibility of senior management, can make it difficult to make decisions about holistic business changes. It can also make it difficult to operationalize those decisions in the transactional, and systems and execution layers of software used by the business. If substantial activities are taking place outside of an enter-prise system of record, in numerous disconnected spreadsheets or point solutions, changes in business process flows and value streams in enter-prise software may not carry over into actual practice in the business. The end result is similar to driving a vehicle on a curvy mountain road with no windshield or steering. There is no visibility and no control. This may be a workable approach in smaller businesses where the various stakeholders and contributors to a business value stream can meet directly on a regular basis. But for large, distributed teams and those managing time-sensitive projects, more structured approaches to communication and the business value stream are required.

When we divide survey respondents into those who said their enterprise software prepared them very well or somewhat well for digital transformation (digital transformation leaders) and those who said their software prepared them not very well or was in impediment (digital transformation laggards), the two groups responded to usability questions very differently.

While software vendors often focus on the look and feel of the user inter-face, respondents who say their software is not helping with digital transfor-mation report usability issues that are instead caused by deficient software architecture. These digital transformation laggards were more likely to say their software vendor could enhance usability by improving integration between modules of the software suite. Functional disconnects between, for instance, project management and finance or between the quality management and manufacturing portions of an application can result if a software suite relies on numerous products that have either been acquired by the software vendor and rebadged, or, in many cases, enterprise software can include white-labeled functionality, i.e. software developed and marketed by third-party vendors and sold as part of the application. In other situations, enterprise software relies on partners to complete a solution, so essential functionality may be delivered by multiple third-party independent software vendors (ISVs). All of these approaches to offering an enterprise solution can result in usability

“Cute-looking software does not necessarily translate into software that allows your users to collaborate and run your business. Usability is much deeper than a graphical user interface. The underlying architecture of the application must be amenable to supporting agility.” Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer, North America, IFS

• To demonstrate their ability to support different business processes and modes of manufacturing, and encompass sites that do different things all in the same business solution.

• About the underlying architecture of the product you are considering and how their functionality uses that architecture to support change readiness.

ASK SOFTWARE VENDORS:


difficulties as users need to master multiple navigational conventions, process flows and underlying data structures.

Ease of Use by Digital Transformation Readiness80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%Very Easy Somewhat Easy Difficult Very Difficult

DT Leader DT Laggard

Improvement Areas by Digital Transformation Readiness70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%Support for

touch screen/tablets

Real-time visualizations

of KPIs

Consistency between modules

Better integration between modules

Easier/faster upgrade

Make easier to align the

software with business

Other


These solutions comprised of disparate software products can also be barriers to agility. As a business process changes, it may affect multiple software products and the integrations between them, requiring expensive services processes that consume budget and, more importantly, time.

Digital transformation laggards were also almost twice as likely to want their software vendor to make it easier to align the software to the business. Enterprise software can generally be changed to conform to shifting business priorities and new business models. Software changes in these organizations may require external consultants, and extensive custom programming work. This can increase the opportunity cost or the timeline required to take advan-tage of fleeting business opportunities. In many of these scenarios, these needs that are not met by the current configuration of enterprise software wind up being addressed with Excel and other point solutions, reducing digital transformation readiness even further.

“Remember that integrations between software products from different companies increase complexity. A change in one system might have unanticipated impacts on the interactions with other systems. This adds complexity, and complexity is the enemy of agility. That is why so many people go to Excel rather than fix their ERP system.” Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer, North America, IFS


KEY FINDING #3Poor Usability Can Affect Personnel RetentionThe ability to hire and retain skilled professionals is a critical factor in digital transformation. Survey data suggests that younger respondents found enter-prise software easier to use than their older counterparts, perhaps because they are in more junior positions and performing relatively straightforward tasks.

Perceived Ease of Use by Age

Very Easy Somewhat Easy Difficult Very Difficult

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% 36-45 36-45 36-4536-45

When software usability is poor, respondents said they would take a number of different corrective steps, up to and including changing jobs! The youngest cohort of 18-35-year-olds are on the one hand digital natives with high expec-tations of software usability. Only 26 percent said they are definitely or some-what likely to change jobs over poor software usability, however. This may be because they are not secure enough in their profession at this stage in their career, or because they are dealing with relatively straightforward elements of enterprise software like work orders, field service technician interfaces or engineering change orders. But 45 percent of the 36-45-year-olds said they were definitely or somewhat likely to change jobs over poor software usability. In each of the 46-55-year-old and 56-plus cohorts, 33 percent of the respon-dents said they were definitely or somewhat likely to change jobs over poor software usability.

Loss of these skilled professionals lead to the wrong kind of business disruption as the skills, knowledge, business connections and creative capacity these people represent walk out the door. But conversely, digital transformation and the associated more progressive technology environment can be a factor in hiring and retention. Poor usability for these respondents who may change jobs is related to the ability of the software to deliver on and facilitate business goals. Ambitious high-skill employees want to make things happen in the organization, and poor usability may be a barrier to their achieving their personal goals. This pattern is borne out in other research. In a recent MIT Sloan Management Review study, 85 percent of millennials and 75 percent of baby boomers said they saw it as important to work for a digital leader.1

So enterprise software usability can work both ways. It can repel experienced and valuable workers when it is bad, even as it serves as an impediment to digital transformation. That enterprise that “gets” digital transformation meanwhile becomes a talent magnet.1 G. C. Kane, D. Palmer, A. N. Phillips, D. Kiron and N. Buckley, “Strategy, Not Technology, Drives Digital Transformation” MIT Sloan Management Review and Deloitte University Press, July 2015.

“In the younger demographics, they don’t have the best understanding of enterprise software. It might not drive them to change their jobs. The middle-aged people, who spike in willingness to change jobs due to poor usability, should be concerning because these are the people driving the business—the movers and shakers. If business software is making the company less competitive, if the company does not have IT systems that enable growth, these driven professionals will go elsewhere. They want to go to companies that are in the forefront of their industries that have a solid IT strategy. They see this as key to their future success in their careers.” Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer, North America, IFS


KEY FINDING #4The Middle Market Has Unique Usability/Digital Transformation ChallengesSurvey data suggests that when it comes to usability, companies in the middle market, between $100 million and $1 billion in revenue, face more severe usability challenges than small to medium-sized companies or enter-prise-level organizations with a billion dollars in revenue or above.

This may be due largely to the degree of complexity these mid-sized businesses face, including multiple divisions with disparate business models and far-flung global operations. In order to compete with larger enterprises, they must operate on as sophisticated a level and, if anything, must exhibit greater enterprise agility and change-readiness. Their IT resources, in the meantime, may consist of a handful of full-time equivalents, and they lack the budget for large systems integration projects each time they make a change to their enterprise software configuration.

Perceived Usability by Company Revenue80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%Less than $50

million$50 million to $100 million

$100 million to $250 million


$500 million to $1 billion

More than $1 billion

Very Easy Somewhat Easy Difficult Very Difficult

When asked where their enterprise software vendor could improve usabili-ty, respondents with middle market companies were more vocal in a number of areas than their counterparts at smaller or larger organizations, which may be indicative of the more challenging environments they find themselves in with relatively few resources. Almost 80 percent of respondents with compa-nies with revenue of between $100 and $250 million wanted access to real-time information on key performance indicators (KPIs). More than 60 percent of respondents with between $250 million and $500 million in revenue want-ed more consistent functionality across modules and better integration between modules.

Companies with more than a billion dollars in revenue seemed more satis-fied with these measures of usability. This may be because these companies are more likely to have the resources for extensive systems integration and programming on an ongoing basis. Middle-market companies meanwhile have a more constricted budget and must struggle with inadequacies where they exist.

“The lower end of the middle market company is underserved by IT. They might not have very mature business processes. They have grown beyond Excel and do not have the IT support to really achieve digital transformation. They are too large to rely on point solutions or in-person communications, but lack the budget and personnel of an enterprise organization.” Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer, North America, IFS


90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%Less than $50

million$50 million to $100 million



$500 million to $1 billion

More than $1 billion

Usability Improvement Areas by Revenue

More Consistent Better Integration Touch Screen/Tablets Real-Time KPIs Align with Business Faster Upgrade


KEY FINDING #5Poor Usability May Be a Barrier to Servitization

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%Field Service Aftermarket MRO Depot Repair Warranty

Digital Transformation Enables Servitization


Respondents who said their enterprise software did a poor job helping them prepare for digital transformation, the Digital Transformation laggard, also were less likely than Digital Transformation laggard to be engaged in service-based business models. This result becomes even more significant when we consider that 88 percent of Digital Transformation laggard reported being in manufacturing-centric business models. With product-related revenue and profit from manufacturing expected to languish in coming years, revenue increases for many of these industrial companies will come from services.

These revenue sources are of critical importance to ensure growth, and can also even out lumpy revenue typical in capital equipment or durable goods. Manufacturers involved in aftermarket service are projecting faster growth than those reliant entirely on product revenue. And this means companies will need to ensure their enterprise software platform can be extended to encompass business models including field service, depot repair, warranty work, maintenance, repair and overhaul and other processes associated with aftermarket service.

Discrete manufacturers, who are more likely to benefit from aftermarket servitization opportunities than their process manufacturing counterparts, are also more likely to be Digital Transformation laggards.

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%Process Discrete

Digital Transformation by Manufacturing Type


“What this really indicates is that respondents who have a clear digital transformation strategy are more adept at enabling new business models. These business models are logical extensions for industrial companies looking for new revenue models. Regardless of the new business model you want to explore, this DT strategy will leave you better prepared than competitors without a strong digital transformation approach.” Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer, North America, IFS


The single largest industry represented among respondents is industrial machinery manufacturing, along with considerable percentages in industrial controls, alternative energy equipment, aerospace and defense, automotive, and other durable goods manufacturing industries. Each of these industries does or will have compelling reasons to have a service organization involved in multiple of these service-based disciplines. Lacking the ability to support complex products after the sale, these companies may need to rely on dealer or service organizations to support their products or simply be unable to offer their customers lifecycle support for complex durable assets. This in turn may put them at a disadvantage compared with more sophisticated manufacturing organizations with the technological infrastructure to profitably manage the mobile technicians, schedules, contracts, vendors and customer experience around aftermarket service.

“Moving into different non-manufacturing business models can be a challenge for discrete manufacturers. Service-oriented disciplines like aftermarket field service, warranty or advanced supply chain or distribution models or spare parts planning require incredible digital visibility. At its core, digital transformation enables that digital visibility that may be lacking in discrete manufacturing in particular. In process industries from chemicals to food and beverage, operations have for years been highly automated, from mixing chemicals to baking bread. By definition, they are already in a highly digital world. In discrete manufacturing, you have highly automated machinery, but it is often not united into a single digital view.” Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer, North America, IFS


METHODOLOGYIFS in North America and the research arm of CFE Media collected 200 survey respondents from a sample of manufacturing, automation/controls and other industrial executives. Data collection and tabulation were managed by Amanda Pelliccione of CFE Media. IFS North America reviewed these tabulations and cross-tabulations to draw inferences relevant to enterprise technology used to manage industrial organizations involved in:

• Field service management

• Aftermarket service

• Maintenance repair and overhaul

• Depot repair

• Warranty/service work

• Manufacturing

• Construction

• Maintenance of their company’s physical assets


RESULTS

Disciplines Central to BusinessDoing some Important Critical to business Will do in the future Not applicable/Don’t know

Field Service Management

Aftermarket Service

Maintenance Repair and Overhaul

Depot Repair

Warranty/Service Work

Manufacturing

Construction

Maintenance of your company’s physical assets

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Enterprise Software Ease of UseVery Difficult

2%

Very Easy14%

Somewhat Easy60%

Difficult24%


0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Action Taken When Enterprise Software is Difficult to UseDefinitely likely Definitely likely Unlikely Would never

Use a free, web-based tool instead

Use PC-based software instead

Engage with the system less or avoid interacting with it

Speak up about usability issues

Just keep using it

Consider changing jobs

PC-Based Software System Alternatives0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Microsoft Excel

Corporate Email

Microsoft Project

Microsoft Access

Share point

Dropbox

Google Docs

Google Sites

Google Sheets

Google Cloud Connect

IBM Notes/Domino formerly Lotus Notes

Facebook Messenger

Yahoo Messenger

MSN Messenger

Other

None


Suggested Improvements to ERP, other Enterprise Software0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Suggested Improvements to ERP, other Enterprise Software

Better integration between modules

Real-time graphic visualization of KPIs

More consistent functionality for one module to the next

Better support for touch screens/tablets

Make it easier to align the software with our business strategy

Easier/faster to upgrade

Other

How Well Enterprise Software Prepares for Digital Transformation

It is an impediment5%

Very well13%

Somewhat well49%

Not well33%

Respondent Age

Prefer not to say4%

18 to 35 years old11%



56 years old or older35%


Industry involvement

0% 10% 20% 30%

Industrial Machinery, Engine, Turbine,…

Industrial Controls, Test or Medical Equipment,…

Chemicals or Pharmaceuticals

Oil, Gas or petroleum Refining incl. Coal Products

Consumer Electronics or Appliances, Electrical…

Plastics or Rubber

Primary or Fabricated Metals

Alternative Energy Equipment, incl. Solar, Wind…

Food, Beverage or Tobacco

Utilities including Electric, Gas Water & Waste

Aircraft, Aerospace or Defense

Wood, Paper or Printing

Automotive or Transportation

Electrical Equipment or Appliances

Plant/Facilities Engineering or Maintenance…

Engineering or System Integration Services,…

Textiles or Apparel

Government or Military

Information, Data Processing or Software…

Mining, Agriculture or Construction

Other

Estimated Company Annual Revenue

Less than $50 million30%

$50 million to $100 million14%

$100 million to$250 million

7%

$250 million to$500 million

7%

$500 million to $1 billion16%

More than $1 billion18%

Don’t know8%

En0

36

4-1

Pro

duct

ion:

IFS

Cor

por

ate

Mar

keti

ng,

Oct

ober

20

17.

IFSworld.comCOPYRIGHT © 2017 INDUSTRIAL AND FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, IFS AB. IFS AND ALL IFS PRODUCTS AND SERVICES NAMES ARE TRADEMARKS OF IFS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN STATEMENTS OF POSSIBLE FUTURE FUNCTIONALIT Y FOR IFS’S PRODUCTS AND TECHNOLOGY. SUCH STATEMENTS ARE FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS ANY COMMITMENT OR REPRESENTATION. THE NAMES OF ACTUAL COMPANIES AND PRODUCTS MENTIONED HEREIN MAY BE THE TRADEMARKS OF THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS.

IFS AB ©2017

IFS is a globally recognized leader in developing and delivering enterprise software for enterprise resource planning (ERP), enterprise asset management (EAM) and enterprise service management (ESM). Founded in 1983, IFS brings customers in targeted sectors closer to their business, and helps them be more agile and prepare for what’s next in their industry. IFS’s 3,300 employees support more than 1 million users worldwide from its network of local offices and through a growing ecosystem of partners. For more information about IFS, visit IFSworld.com

AMERICAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +1 888 437 4968

ARGENTINA, BRAZIL, CANADA, ECUADOR, MEXICO, UNITED STATES

ASIA PACIFIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +65 63 33 33 00

AUSTRALIA, INDONESIA, JAPAN, MALAYSIA, NEW ZEALAND, PHILIPPINES, PR CHINA, SINGAPORE, THAILAND

EUROPE EAST AND CENTRAL ASIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +48 22 577 45 00

BALKANS, CZECH REPUBLIC, GEORGIA, HUNGARY, ISRAEL, KAZAKHSTAN, POLAND, RUSSIA AND CIS, SLOVAKIA, TURKEY, UKRAINE

EUROPE CENTRAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +49 9131 77 340

AUSTRIA, BELGIUM, GERMANY, ITALY, NETHERLANDS, SWITZERLAND

EUROPE WEST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +44 1494 428 900

FRANCE, IRELAND, PORTUGAL, SPAIN, UNITED KINGDOM

MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+971 4390 0888

INDIA, SOUTH AFRICA, SRI LANKA, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES

SCANDINAVIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+46 13 460 4000

DENMARK, NORWAY, SWEDEN

FINLAND AND THE BALTIC AREA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +358 102 17 9300

ESTONIA, FINLAND, LATVIA, LITHUANIA

ABOUT IFS

Documents

ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION · 2020-05-02 · 4 ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION other criteria. So we can say definitively that