The BARC BI Survey 10 – QlikView Highlightsgo.qlikview.com/rs/qliktech/images/GLBL_2012_H1_BARC_BI_Survey_WP.pdfWebFOCUS, arcplan, TARGIT BI Suite, SAP BusinessObjects Web Intelligence,

The BARC BI Survey 10 – QlikView Highlights

QlikView Ranks First in10 Critical Categories A ‘BI Giants’ Peer Group Comparison

Date Published December 2011

Usage For public distribution

The BARC BI Survey 10―QlikView Highlights | 2

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...................................................................................... 2

The BI Survey 10 Methodology ................................................................ 3

Highlights and Key Findings from the BI Survey 10 .............................. 4

QlikView Peer Comparison ....................................................................... 5

Software Purchases Based on Features ................................................. 6

Overall Agility ............................................................................................ 7

Implementation Time ................................................................................. 8

Performance Satisfaction ......................................................................... 9

Suitability.................................................................................................... 10

Overall Business Achievement ................................................................ 11

Product Quality .......................................................................................... 12

Overall Quality and Support ..................................................................... 13

Customer Loyalty ...................................................................................... 14

Intent to Buy More Licenses .................................................................... 15


The BI Survey 10 Methodology

In October 2011, Business Application Research Center (BARC) published The BI Survey 10—

The Customer Verdict (www.bi-survey.com). BARC gathered the information contained in this

study via a comprehensive survey of business intelligence end users, consultants, and vendors.

The BI Survey 10 provides a detailed quantitative analysis providing insight into why and how

customers selected BI tools, what they used them for, how successful they were, and why they

eventually abandoned some tools. The study was based on the analysis of survey results from

2,961 respondents reporting real-world experiences. After cleansing the data and removing

responses of those who were not able to answer specific questions on BI tools, 2,006 users, 256

consultants, and 403 vendors from around the world remained. No technology vendors were

involved with the formulation of The BI Survey 10. It was not commissioned, suggested,

sponsored, or influenced by vendors. BARC included no sponsored or private questions, and the

questions were presented without reference to vendors.

The survey analyzed all products that attracted more than 30 survey responses. This year, 26

products are included. These products (in order from most respondents to least) are: QlikTech

(QlikView), BOARD, Phocas, MicroStrategy, Microsoft SQL Server Analysis Services, Jedox,

Tableau, SAP BW, IBM Cognos BI, Bissantz, Cubeware Cockpit, Information Builders

WebFOCUS, arcplan, TARGIT BI Suite, SAP BusinessObjects Web Intelligence, MIK, Panorama,

Jaspersoft, Oracle BIEE, Cyberscience, Microsoft SQL Server Reporting Services, SAS,

Dimensional Insight, Evidanza, IBM Cognos TM1, and Oracle Hyperion.

The BI Survey 10 included a sample of 182 respondents who use QlikTech’s product, QlikView.

All QlikView users who specified a version stated that they used the then-current version 10.

This document, produced by QlikTech and approved by BARC, highlights several of QlikView’s

strengths as identified by The BI Survey 10.

The charts in this report compare QlikView against its primary peer group, which BARC

designates as the BI Giants. The BI Giants peer group includes companies with $200m+ annual

revenues and a truly international reach: IBM Cognos BI, Information Builders, Microsoft SSRS,

MicroStrategy, Oracle BIEE, Oracle Hyperion, QlikTech, SAP BO Web Intelligence, SAP BW

BEx Suite, and SAS.


Highlights and Key Findings from the BI Survey 10 In The BI Survey 10, QlikView earned a top ranking in its peer group in 10 critical areas:

1. Software Purchases Based on Features—BARC believes that buying a product for its features, as opposed to pricing or “strategic” considerations, sends a clear message. (See p. 6)

2. Overall Agility—QlikView scored highest in its peer group in delivering what BARC refers to as “Agile BI”—a style of business intelligence that promises faster, better results. (See p. 7)

3. Implementation Time—The evidence shows that it’s better to go live faster, and that QlikView provides the fastest implementations in its peer group. (See p. 8)

4. Performance Satisfaction—Performance satisfaction is crucial in business intelligence projects—and QlikView customers had the fewest complaints of any product users. (See p. 9)

5. Suitability—Customers reported that QlikView was the product in its peer group best suited to the projects it was chosen for. (See p. 10)

6. Overall Business Achievement—Business achievement combines business benefits and goal achievement to measure real benefits after implementation. (See p. 11)

7. Product Quality—Customers reported fewer problems with QlikView than with any other product in its peer group. (See p. 12)

8. Overall Quality and Support—QlikView had the fewest reported problems to rank first in product quality, and scored strongly in both vendor support and implementer support. (See p. 13)

9. Customer Loyalty—For the third year in a row, QlikView ranked first in its peer group for customer loyalty. (See p. 14)

10. Intent to Buy More Licenses—Customers know best, and BARC considers it is a very positive sign when existing customers say they expect to purchase more licenses. (See p. 15)

QlikTech had enough responses for all KPIs to be calculated reliably. The sample size was 182.


QlikView Peer Comparison QlikView ranked highest among its peers in 10 critical categories, including customer loyalty, overall quality and support, performance satisfaction, overall agility, and implementation time. The following pages illustrate the individual category comparisons in more detail and provide insight on why BARC considers these areas to be important for consideration when purchasing BI software.

Figure 1: QlikView Peer Group Comparison – BI Giants

0

0.5

1

1.5Bought for features

Competitiveness

Plans for more

licenses

Loyalty

Performance

satisfaction

Product quality

Suitability

Quality and

support

Project length

Agility

BI Giants: QlikView Comes in First

QlikView

Information Builders

MicroStrategy

SAS

Microsoft SSRS

Oracle Hyperion

Oracle BIEE

SAP BO WebI

SAP BW BEx Suite

IBM Cognos BI


Software Purchases Based on Features When choosing a software product, companies may be motivated by price, bundling options, vendor relationships and sales skills, or a host of other reasons unrelated to the qualities of the product itself. BARC believes that companies that buy products for the features instead of citing price or “strategic" reasons are sending a clear message that the product itself is worth having. QlikView customers were the most likely to make their purchase decision based on features, and often indicate the depth and breadth of QlikView capabilities as a strong motivator.

Figure 2: Software Purchases Based on Features KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

IBM Cognos BI

SAP BW BEx Suite

SAP BO WebI

Oracle BIEE

Oracle Hyperion

Microsoft SSRS

SAS

MicroStrategy


QlikView

Software Purchase Based on Features


Overall Agility

QlikView scored highest in its peer group for delivering what BARC refers to as “Agile BI”—a style of business intelligence project that promises faster, better results. To measure agility, BARC considered KPIs for the following: Seats per administrator—how many full-time administrators were needed per user. Project length—fast implementation time is a key measure of project success. Self service—what activities users carry out themselves with the BI product. In-house implementation—how often the BI tool is used in projects without external help.

Figure 3: Overall Agility KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4

SAP BO WebI

SAP BW BEx Suite

MicroStrategy

Oracle Hyperion

IBM Cognos BI

QlikView

Agility


Implementation Time Slow and late implementations continue to be one of the biggest problems with many IT projects, including BI applications. BARC asked respondents how long it took to implement BI projects (from software purchase to initial rollout), and found that QlikView provided the fastest implementations in its peer group. The evidence shows that it’s definitely better to go live faster—with extended implementation periods problems mount up, success is more difficult to achieve, and the chances of achieving benefits fall sharply.

Figure 4: Implementation Time KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

QlikView


Microsoft SSRS

Oracle Hyperion

MicroStrategy

Oracle BIEE

SAS

SAP BW BEx Suite

IBM Cognos BI

SAP BO WebI

Fastest Time to Implement


Performance Satisfaction Performance satisfaction is crucial in business intelligence projects. It’s more than just a technical issue, because it affects project outcomes, business benefits, and goal achievements, and business-user adoption lags when performance is unacceptable. BARC asked how common performance complaints were—and found that QlikView customers had the fewest complaints across all products in all peer groups.

Figure 5: Performance Satisfaction KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

IBM Cognos BI

Oracle Hyperion

SAP BO WebI

Oracle BIEE

SAP BW BEx Suite

MicroStrategy

Microsoft SSRS


SAS

QlikView

Most Satisfied with Performance


Suitability This is the first year that BARC has included the suitability KPI in its report. It’s a measure of how suitable a product is for the scope of the projects it’s chosen for, and it was one of the subcategories used to calculate the Quality and Support KPI. Based on customer feedback, BARC found a strong correlation between product suitability and achieving business benefits. Customers reported that QlikView was the product in its peer group best suited to the projects it was chosen for.

Figure 6: Suitability KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

Oracle Hyperion

Microsoft SSRS

IBM Cognos BI

SAP BO WebI

SAP BW BEx Suite

SAS

Oracle BIEE

MicroStrategy


QlikView

Suitability


Overall Business Achievement The business achievement KPI measure the real benefit of projects to the company after implementation, and is calculated by combining two other extremely important KPIs: The business benefit KPI focuses on the bottom-line benefit of a BI project, rather than on individual technical aspects. The goal achievement KPI measures whether the goals that were set at the beginning of a project were successfully achieved. QlikView scored strongly for both business benefits and goal achievement to earn the top ranking for overall business achievement.

Figure 7: Overall Business Achievement KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

QlikView


MicroStrategy

SAS

Microsoft SSRS

Oracle Hyperion

Oracle BIEE

SAP BO WebI

SAP BW BEx Suite

IBM Cognos BI

Business Achievement Index


Product Quality QlikView received top ranking for product quality, with customers reporting fewer problems with QlikView than with any other product in its peer group. Problems considered were: Data-related, including poor quality data or inability to get data from some systems. People-related, including administrative problems, requirements problems, user adoption, or other issues. Technical-related, including missing key features, product could not handle data volumes, performance too slow, security limitations, too hard to use, or unreliability.

Figure 8: Product Quality KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

IBM Cognos BI

Oracle Hyperion

Microsoft SSRS

SAP BO WebI

SAS

Oracle BIEE

SAP BW BEx Suite


MicroStrategy

QlikView

QlikView Customers Most Satisfied with Product

Quality


Overall Quality and Support Because product quality and support are clearly related, BARC included this KPI to measure the two together. To take the top ranking in this category, QlikView ranked first in product quality with the fewest reported problems and scored strongly in both vendor support and implementer support. Vendor support measured the quality of support provided by QlikView. Implementer support measured the quality of support provided by third-party implementers.

Figure 9: Overall Quality and Support KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

QlikView

MicroStrategy


Oracle BIEE

SAP BW BEx Suite

SAP BO WebI

SAS

Oracle Hyperion

IBM Cognos BI

Microsoft SSRS

Overall Quality and Support


Customer Loyalty For the third year in a row, QlikView ranked first in its peer group for customer loyalty. As BARC points out in its survey analysis, customer loyalty indicates that users are comfortable with a product and can easily use it for its intended purpose. For the 2011 survey, BARC measured customer loyalty by combining the quantified results from four analyses: inclination to buy more seats, deterrents to wider deployment, rate of product renewal, and standardization tendencies.

Figure 10: Customer Loyalty KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

SAP BW BEx Suite

SAP BO WebI

Oracle Hyperion

MicroStrategy

IBM Cognos BI

QlikView

Customer Loyalty Index


Intent to Buy More Licenses If you want to know how a product performs in the real world, just ask the customers who use it every day. All too often, though, they’ll tell you that a product doesn’t live up to their expectations. Those customers probably aren’t using all the licenses they own, and certainly won’t be buying more. That’s why BARC considers it is a very positive sign if existing customers say they expect to purchase more licenses. QlikView is so popular with users it’s often been said to have a “viral” appeal—which explains why QlikView once again leads its peer group in intent to purchase more licenses.

Figure 11: Intent to Buy More Licenses KPI – Comparison of BI Giants Peer Group

For more information about QlikView, please visit: www.QlikView.com To learn more about the complete survey, please visit: www.bi-survey.com

© 2011 QlikTech International AB. All rights reserved. QlikTech, QlikView, Qlik, Q, Simplifying Analysis for Everyone, Power of Simplicity, New Rules, The Uncontrollable Smile and other QlikTech products and services as well as their respective logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of QlikTech International AB. All other company names, products and services used herein are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The information published herein is subject to change without notice. This publication is for informational purposes only, without representation or warranty of any kind, and QlikTech shall not be liable for errors or omissions with respect to this publication. The only warranties for QlikTech products and services are those that are set forth in the express warranty statements accompanying such products and services, if any. Nothing herein should be construed as constituting any additional warranty.

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6

QlikView


Microsoft SSRS

Oracle Hyperion

MicroStrategy

SAP BO WebI

SAP BW BEx Suite

SAS

Oracle BIEE

IBM Cognos BI

Intent to Buy More

Documents

The BARC BI Survey 10 – QlikView Highlightsgo.qlikview.com/rs/qliktech/images/GLBL_2012_H1_BARC_BI_Survey_WP.pdfWebFOCUS, arcplan, TARGIT BI Suite, SAP BusinessObjects Web Intelligence,