Vendor Landscape: Web Experience ManagementInfo-Tech Research Group 5 Web Experience Management Vendor selection / knock-out criteria: market share, mind share, and platform coverage

1 Info-Tech Research Group

Vendor Landscape: Web Experience Management Give users experience… and then take their money.


Websites are no longer just about presenting static content. They are now

about creating unique experiences and turning customers into paying fans.

Introduction

Enterprises seeking to select a solution for Web

Experience Management (WEM).

Their WEM use case may include:

• Organizations that want to deliver dynamic

content as part of their marketing initiatives.

• Organizations that want to expand their digital

presence to mobile devices, including the

development of mobile apps.

• Organizations looking to align their marketing

campaigns across multiple channels.

This Research Is Designed For: This Research Will Help You:

Understand what’s new in the WEM market.

Evaluate WEM vendors and products for your

enterprise needs.

Determine which products are most appropriate

for particular use cases and scenarios.

Web Experience Management is about the creation

of tailored experiences and converting website

visitors into customers and fans.

Look at Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscape: Web Content

Management for additional web management

solutions that focus on giving control over content

management to marketing departments.

Info-Tech Insight

http://www.infotech.com/research/ss/select-a-web-content-management-solution



Executive Summary

Info-Tech evaluated eight competitors in the WEM market,

including the following notable performers:

Champions:

• Sitecore provides a comprehensive solution for WEM. Sitecore

has a strong focus on development and has experienced global

growth.

• Adobe offers a solution that empowers marketers and engages

website visitors. Adobe’s cloud deployment capabilities and

campaign management tools make them a leader in this space.

• Ektron continues to improve its WEM products. It does a solid job in terms of localization for multi-site content delivery and features “in-context” analytics data.

• OpenText has a solid feature offering and advanced search

capabilities, making it a strong WEM option.

Value Award:

• Acquia/Drupal, delivered by Acquia, is an extensible product, has

many core features, and is a clear value winner.

Trend Setter Award:

• Autonomy continues to push forward in terms of innovative new

features, including its advance analytics and upcoming mobile

delivery capabilities.

1. Social integration is key:

Vendors in this space are starting to take

advantage of information available on social

sites. They are now using it to deliver

personalized content as well as develop an

awareness of public sentiment surrounding

an organization.

2. Multiple channels, continuous

experience:

The ability to maintain a coherent, ongoing

experience across multiple channels is

important for creating a great user

experience. As a result, vendors are

beginning to include print materials in

addition to web, mobile, social, and email.

3. Action-based analytics:

Analytics are great, but being given

prescriptive advice on changes to improve

your content is better. Several vendors are

providing built-in advice and best practices

based on website usage and search terms.

Info-Tech Insight


Market Overview

• Large enterprises with multiple consumer brands

needed a solution to control multiple separate company

websites.

• WCM tools evolved to include several role based tools

that could manage content across websites at the level

of individual content pieces.

• Legacy vendors such as Day, Vignette, and RedDot

brought simple, easy-to-use user interfaces allowing

other departments to participate in website design and

management.

• Autonomy’s IDOL engine pioneered using search and

analytics as a platform to match content to user

persona.

• The large vendors consolidated WCM products with

analytics, search, and CRM products thus creating a

separate class of products collectively known as Web

Experience Management (WEM).

• The market will continue to add vendors as traditional

WCM vendors add Search Engine Optimization (SEO)

and marketing analytics to their products.

• The increased pressure to align across all potential

channels (web, mobile, email, social, and print) will lead

more vendors to bring social management tools directly

into the WEM product.

• As the offerings mature the products will have to

increase the number of potential customer interactions

to drive and monitor consumer web experience.

• The increasing ability of WEM to be deployed on the

Cloud will drive competition for mid-market clients.

• The increased amount of data generated by websites

will drive demand for integration of not only marketing

analytics but wider analytics and data integration with all

enterprise applications.

How it got here Where it’s going

As the market evolves, capabilities that were once cutting edge become default and new functionality

becomes differentiating. Template control has become a Table Stakes capability and should no longer be

used to differentiate solutions. Instead focus on social marketing and multi-channel support to get the best

fit for your requirements.


Web Experience Management Vendor selection / knock-out criteria: market share, mind share, and platform coverage

• Adobe. With the acquisition of Day Software in 2010, Adobe provides an agile, integrated digital marketing solution.

• Autonomy, an HP company. A solution with strong search capabilities, Autonomy offers an enterprise-level WEM

product.

• Acquia/Drupal. A Drupal-based solution delivered by Acquia. Acquia delivers affordable WEM features for organizations

on a budget.

• Ektron. Ektron provides a capable WEM solution. The upcoming release of Digital Experience Hub will allow the

integration of external marketing tools.

• OpenText. OpenText’s scalable WEM solution can meet enterprise level requirements.

• Oracle. The acquisition of Fatwire Software in 2011 has enabled Oracle to add key functionalities to its WEM product.

• SDL. SDL’s robust WEM solution is focused on meeting the needs of global organizations.

• Sitecore. Sitecore is undergoing global growth and provides a scalable and flexible solution for web experience.

Included in this Vendor Landscape:

• Trends in WEM include optimized mobile delivery, the provision of content relevant to the user, the integration with social

media, and the use of analytics to make informed decisions around content creation. All vendors included in this

landscape have solutions for some, if not all, of these emerging trends.

• For this Vendor Landscape, Info-Tech focused on those vendors that offer broad capabilities across multiple platforms

and that have a strong market presence and/or reputational presence among mid-sized and large enterprises.


Criteria Weighting: The Table Stakes

Web Experience Management criteria & weighting factors

35%

5% 25%

35%

50%

50%

Vendor is committed to the space and has a

future product and portfolio roadmap. Strategy

Vendor offers global coverage and is able to sell

and provide post-sales support. Reach

Vendor is profitable, knowledgeable, and will be

around for the long-term. Viability

Vendor channel strategy is appropriate and the

channels themselves are strong. Channel

The three year TCO of the solution is

economical. Affordability

The delivery method of the solution aligns with

what is expected within the space. Architecture

The solution’s dashboard and reporting tools are

intuitive and easy to use. Usability

The solution provides basic

and advanced feature/functionality. Features

30%

30%

15%

25%

Features Usability

Architecture Affordability

Product

Vendor

Viability Strategy

Channel Reach

Product Evaluation Criteria

Vendor Evaluation Criteria


The Info-Tech Vendor Landscape:

The Info-Tech Web Experience Management Vendor Landscape

Champions receive high scores for most evaluation

criteria and offer excellent value. They have a strong

market presence and are usually the trend setters

for the industry.

Market Pillars are established players with very

strong vendor credentials, but with more average

product scores.

Innovators have demonstrated innovative product

strengths that act as their competitive advantage in

appealing to niche segments of the market.

Emerging Players are newer vendors who are

starting to gain a foothold in the marketplace. They

balance product and vendor attributes, though score

lower relative to market Champions.

For an explanation of how the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape is created, see Information Presentation – Vendor Landscape in the Appendix.

The Zones of the Landscape

Adobe Autonomy

Acquia/ Drupal

Ektron

OpenText

Oracle WebCenter

SDL

Sitecore


=Exemplary =Good =Adequate =Inadequate =Poor

Balance individual strengths to find the best fit for your enterprise

Product Vendor

Features Usability Viability Strategy Channel

Oracle

WebCenter

Acquia/Drupal

Autonomy

Ektron 8.6

OpenText CEM

Adobe CQ 5.5

Reach Overall Overall

SDL Tridion

Sitecore DMS

Legend

Afford. Arch.

For an explanation of how the Info-Tech Harvey Balls are calculated, see Information Presentation – Criteria Scores (Harvey Balls) in the Appendix.

*

*

* The vendor declined to provide pricing, and publicly available pricing could not be found.

*


What is a Value Score?

The Info-Tech Web Experience Management Value Index

40 50

60 70

80 90

30 20

10

The Value Score indexes each vendor’s

product offering and business strength

relative to their price point. It does

not indicate vendor ranking.

Vendors that score high offer more bang-for-

the-buck (e.g. features, usability, stability,

etc.) than the average vendor, while the

inverse is true for those that score lower.

Price-conscious enterprises may wish to give

the Value Score more consideration than

those who are more focused on specific

vendor/product attributes.

On a relative basis, Drupal maintained

the highest Info-Tech Value ScoreTM of

the vendor group. Vendors were indexed

against Drupal’s performance to provide

a complete, relative view of their product

offerings.

Champion

11

Sitecore*

0

SDL* Drupal

100

0

OpenText

9

Oracle Adobe

25

Autonomy

28

Ektron

92

Average Score: 44

For an explanation of how the Info-Tech Value Index is calculated, see Information Presentation – Value Index in the Appendix.

For an explanation of how price is determined, see Information Presentation – Price Evaluation in the Appendix.

* Vendor declined to provide pricing, and

publicly available pricing could not be found


Table Stakes represent the minimum standard; without these, a product doesn’t even get reviewed

Most WEM solutions are enterprise-level and focused on marketing strategy, not price. If price is your

discriminator between products, you are looking at the products. For solutions that are focused on content

management turn to Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscape: Web Content Management which covers a range of

products and price points.

The products assessed in this Vendor

LandscapeTM meet, at the very least, the

requirements outlined as Table Stakes.

Many of the vendors go above and beyond the

outlined Table Stakes, some even do so in

multiple categories. This section aims to

highlight the products’ capabilities in excess

of the criteria listed here.

The Table Stakes What Does This Mean?

Tools for understanding behavior of logged-in

members. Analytics suite

Associated content repositories for dynamic

content presentation.

Content

repositories

Native ability to, at a minimum, send email

through WEM. Marketing tools

Includes editing and workflow control for website

management.

Full WCM

module

Content presented based on the user’s profile

and their use of the website.

Dynamic

content creation

Technical tools to ensure global branding. Template

control

What it is: Feature



Advanced Features are the capabilities that allow for granular market differentiation

Info-Tech scored each vendor’s features

offering as a summation of their individual

scores across the listed advanced features.

Vendors were given 1 point for each feature

the product inherently provided. Some

categories were scored on a more granular

scale with vendors receiving half points.

Advanced reporting capabilities, including video

analytics. Site analytics

Search results are tailored based on customer

persona. SEO best practices/advice are offered.

Advanced

search

Ability to publish content to external social

networks and monitor customer sentiment.

Social

marketing

Ability to pull in personalization information from

social site logins e.g., Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Social media

integration

The support of global brand delivery across

websites, social sites, print, email, etc.

Multi-channel

support

Ability to tailor and target content delivery based

on IP capture, geo-location, login, user activity.

Content

tailoring

Multi-site brand ownership and the ability to

easily import static 3rd party developer pages.

Campaign

administration

Able to use different platforms, i.e. Java, .NET

etc.

Cross platform

integration

Custom delivery of content over mobile devices

and the ability to create apps.

Mobile device

customization

What we looked for: Feature

Advanced Features Scoring Methodology

For an explanation of how Advanced Features are determined, see Information Presentation – Feature Ranks (Stop Lights) in the Appendix.


=Feature Unsatisfactory =Feature partially present/pending =Feature fully present

Each vendor offers a different feature set; concentrate on what your organization needs

Social

media

Social

marketing

Advanced

search

Multi-

channel

Campaign

admin.

Content

tailoring

Site

Analytics

Cross-

platform

Mobile

delivery

Legend

Evaluated Features

Oracle

WebCenter

Acquia/Drupal

Autonomy

Ektron 8.6

OpenText CEM

Adobe CQ 5.5

SDL Tridion

Sitecore DMS

For an explanation of how Advanced Features are determined, see Information Presentation – Feature Ranks (Stop Lights) in the Appendix.


Product:

Employees:

Headquarters:

Website:

Founded:

Presence:

Sitecore Customer

Engagement Platform

450+

Copenhagen, Denmark

sitecore.net

2001

Private

Sitecore DMS is a great .NET product that is rapidly evolving through R&D investment

Champion • Sitecore CEP is built on the Microsoft .NET platform.

• Sitecore has one of the largest research and development

teams in the industry and is dedicated to providing a product

that works for marketing, but meets IT needs.

Overview

• Sitecore DMS provides multi-channel support for marketing

campaigns, complete with an optimization center that allows

marketers to see how the campaign is doing, where the issues

are, and provide prescriptive advice for changes to achieve

greater success.

• Sitecore’s Mobile SDK provides tools for the creation of native

mobile apps that can be built on a flexible cross-platform

framework. iOS and Android mobile platforms are supported.

Strengths

• Sitecore requires the additional “Jungle Torch” module to

monitor customer sentiment.

Challenges

The vendor declined to provide pricing, and


$1 $1M+

http://www.sitecore.net/


Sitecore provides a flexible framework for creating mobile apps and informative analytics

Features

Info-Tech Recommends:

With strong global growth and a focus on product development, Sitecore provides a solid WEM solution,

great for .NET organizations doing multi-channel marketing.

Vendor Landscape

“With Sitecore, we are able to better respond to market needs and understand what

our customers want — allowing us to adjust our content in real-time and gain a

competitive edge.

Peter Østerhaab Poulsen, Online Manager, YouSee

“Sitecore has a great API and an excellent user interface. The learning curve can be

a bit steep; but once you understand it, the system can do anything.

Anonymous

What we’re hearing

Product Vendor

Feat. Use. Afford. Via. Strat. Chan. Reach Arch. Overall Overall

Social

media

Social

market. Search

Multi-

channel Analytics

Content

tailoring

Camp.

Admin. Mobile

Cross

platform

N/A Value Index

The vendor declined to provide pricing,

and publicly available pricing could not be

found


Product:

Employees:

Headquarters:

Website:

Founded:

Presence:

Endpoint Security & Data

Protection

1,200+

Abingdon, UK

Sophos.com

1985

Privately Held

Adobe CQ 5.5 is a robust product capable of providing engaging customer experiences

Champion

• With the recent release of CQ 5.5 and Cloud Manager, Adobe

provides a flexible solution designed to meet marketing’s needs.

Overview

• Adobe CQ provides a marketing campaign management

module that enables the creation and monitoring of campaigns.

• Adobe CQ natively integrates with Adobe SiteCatalyst to offer

robust analytics. With drag and drop functionality, one is able to

place analytics on specific pages and define what component is

to be tracked.

• Adobe CQ integrates with social sites, enabling the use of

external customer data to deliver targeted content.

Strengths

• Adobe CQ 5.5 provides support for mobile channels but offers

only limited support for print and email.

• While Adobe can push content out to external social sites, it

does not have the capability to monitor customer’s opinions

being expressed on these sites.

• The solution does not provide advice for optimizing the creation

of metadata to make the content easier to retrieve or discover

by site visitors.

Challenges

Adobe CQ 5.5

9963

San Jose, CA

adobe.com

1982

NASDAQ: ADBE

3 year TCO for this solution falls into pricing

tier 8, between $250,000 and $500,000

$1 $1M+

Pricing provided by vendor

http://www.adobe.com/


Adobe has a strong solution for the quick deployment of web campaigns, but lacks extended multi-channel support

25 5th out of 8

Value Index

Social

media

Social

market. Search

Multi-

channel Analytics

Features


Adobe is a great choice for large organizations looking for an e-commerce solution. It is able to plug into

any backend commerce platform, deliver tailored content to consumers, and quickly launch new

campaigns.

Content

tailoring

Camp.

Admin. Mobile

Cross

platform

Vendor Landscape

“Adobe CQ gives us a competitive advantage to leverage new content opportunities

and introduce new features to market quickly to capture sponsor dollars.

Dan Check, Technology Director, Slate

“Adobe is lean on best practices and tutorials... they're finally starting to get more

hands-on material out there.

Anonymous


Product Vendor



Product:

Employees:

Headquarters:

Website:

Founded:

Presence:

OpenText Customer

Experience Management

~4400

Waterloo, Ontario

opentext.com

1991

NASDAQ: OTEX, TSX: OTC

With advanced search and navigation capabilities, OpenText delivers an excellent web experience

Champion • Founded in 1991, OpenText has a strong background in content

management.

• OpenText’s Customer Experience Management accounts for

20% of its business.

Overview

• OpenText provides semantic navigation, uses authority control

for search terms, and does full text search, allowing customers

to find the information they seek.

• OpenText offers sentiment analytics, making the analytical

information immediately actionable.

• OpenText has a browser plug-in that can take content layout

from any website and create a usable template and framework.

• Integration with the Customer Communications Management

solution facilitates print and fax communication.

Strengths

• The solution fails to provide advice regarding Search Engine

Optimization best practices.

• It does not offer multi-channel support for email channels

OpenText does not have the ability to pull in personalization

information from social site logins (e.g. Facebook, Twitter, etc.).

Challenges

$1 $1M+


tier 8, between $250,000 and $500,000

http://www.opentext.com/


While OpenText is able to publish content out to external sites, it doesn’t offer social site logins to pull in visitor information

Features


OpenText is an ideal solution for content heavy websites. With strong search capabilities, site visitors are

easily and quickly brought to the information they seek.

Vendor Landscape

“It is only accessible to people who are qualified to change things. We can lock

down the overall look and feel of the site and enable editors to only change certain

things.

James Kramer, Webmaster/Web Developer, Sloan Valve

“The user interface is awkward in the add-ons and in the actual application.

Business Systems Analyst


Product Vendor


Social

media

Social

market. Search

Multi-

channel Analytics

Content

tailoring

Camp.

Admin. Mobile

Cross

platform

28 3rd out of 8

Value Index


Product:

Employees:

Headquarters:

Website:

Founded:

Presence:

Endpoint Security & Data

Protection

1,200+

Abingdon, UK

Sophos.com

1985

Privately Held

Ektron has quickly developed a competitive product

Champion


tier 5, between $25,000 and $50,000

$1 $1M+

• Entering the WEM market in 2007, Ektron continues to improve

their WEM products with the recent release of Digital

Experience Hub (DxH).

Overview

• Ektron provides a multi-language fallback solution, enabling

local sites to be presented in local language.

• Analytics data is brought into the context of the content editing

page and can be quickly accessed to gain real-time information

in order to inform content management decisions.

• Ektron 8.6 provides Microsoft’s FAST search service out-of-the-

box and the solution also is able to hook into other search

engines, allowing customers to leverage their existing

investments.

Strengths

• Ektron is optimized for .NET environments. Users of other

platforms and technologies may find the system difficult to

deploy and operate.

Challenges

Ektron 8.6

~225

Nashua, New Hampshire

ektron.com

1998

Private


http://www.ektron.com/


Ektron provides excellent page analytics and search functionality, but lags in social capabilities

92 2nd out of 8

Value Index

Features


Ektron is a strong contender for small-mid market .NET shops. While not as advanced as competitors, it

does a solid job in terms of localization for multi-site content delivery and features “in-context” analytics

data.

Vendor Landscape

“I love the 8.5 Ektron Framework API. It takes care of functions like paging and

caching that I used to have to write. It is fundamentally changing how Ektron

websites are developed. The Framework API provides a consistent and discoverable

way to retrieve information from the system.

Anonymous

“Their progress in 8.5 has shown their commitment to making development easier

and keeping the content authoring process simple.

Anonymous


Product Vendor


Social

media

Social

market. Search

Multi-

channel Analytics

Content

tailoring

Camp.

Admin. Mobile

Cross

platform


Product:

Employees:

Headquarters:

Website:

Founded:

Presence:

Acquia/Drupal

200+

Burlington, MA

acquia.com

1999 (Drupal Project)

Private

Acquia/Drupal’s developer community makes this open source product a viable and affordable option

Market Pillar • Drupal is an open source product backed by a strong developer

community.

• Acquia’s version of Drupal provides an enterprise level WEM

product.

Overview

• Drupal is capable of integrating with social sites. Content can be

created in Drupal and then published out to external sites.

• Enables the monitoring and import of external content, such as

Tweets and Chatter.

• Website content can be personalized for visitors based on their

user login, or explicit factors, such as IP addresses and their

geo-location.

• Drupal has an open data model to support mash-up of content

as required.

Strengths

• Drupal does not have the ability to create native mobile apps.

• Drupal does not offer built-in analytics; however, it does

integrate with third-party solutions, such as Google Analytics

and SiteCatalyst.

Challenges


tier 1, less than $2,500

$1 $1M+


http://www.acquia.com/


Although Acquia/Drupal is lacking in advanced features, it integrates with social media and delivers personalized content

100 1st out of 8

Value Index

Features


Drupal is a great solution for small or non-profit organizations. While not as robust as competitors, it

provides some key functionalities for generating user-centric websites, but at a fraction of the cost.

Vendor Landscape

“Does most things well, which are required. Low capital costs. Community support is

sufficient in most cases. Expert staff can usually diagnose work around most

problems due to the openness of the code. Works well for us.

Dr. Daniel P. Lang, Head of IT Operations, UN OCHA

“It is big and somewhat unwieldy.

Anonymous


Product Vendor


Social

media

Social

market. Search

Multi-

channel Analytics

Content

tailoring

Camp.

Admin. Mobile

Cross

platform


Product:

Employees:

Headquarters:

Website:

Founded:

Presence:

Autonomy, an HP company

350,000

San Francisco, CA

autonomy.com

1939

NYSE: HPQ

This innovative vendor provides an impressive enterprise-level solution

Innovator • Autonomy provides a forward-looking, enterprise-level solution

for WEM.

• Autonomy is capable of supporting and delivering content to

multiple channels and platforms.

Overview

• Autonomy offers comprehensive customer targeting and

personalization capabilities. The solution provides granular

control over targeting, from establishing fixed segments to 1:1

personalization based on behavior.

• Autonomy has robust search and analysis capabilities. It is able

to analyze unstructured data and identify negative or positive

sentiment in user-generated comments.

• Autonomy is the only vendor to have integrated call center

analytics into its WEM to give a complete user experience.

Strengths

• As Autonomy is focused on providing a solution for enterprise

level organizations, smaller organizations may find receiving

support a challenge.

• Autonomy does not have the capability to support the creation

of native mobile apps.

Challenges


tier 8, between $250,000 and $500,000

$1 $1M+


http://www.autonomy.com/


Autonomy does most things well; however, lacking in its solution is the ability to create native mobile apps

25 4th out of 8

Value Index

Features


Autonomy is excellent for enterprise-level organizations or organizations that require strong search

capabilities and the ability to contextually deliver multi-media content.

Vendor Landscape

“We’ve always come back to Autonomy because they lead the market. The

functionality that they provide us meets our needs to the T. They’ve always moved

along in this content management space well ahead of the marketplace.

Anonymous, Solutions Architect

“We had some challenges in terms of resources and the implementation process is

taking longer than I anticipated. There is a steep learning curve, this is like no other

system we’ve put in before.

Janet H. Woods, CIO, Tampa Bay Times


Product Vendor


Social

media

Social

market. Search

Multi-

channel Analytics

Content

tailoring

Camp.

Admin. Mobile

Cross

platform


Product:

Employees:

Headquarters:

Website:

Founded:

Presence:

SDL Tridion

2,700+

Maidenhead, UK

sdl.com

1992

LSE:SDL

SDL specializes in brand management across global enterprises

Emerging Player • SDL is focused on providing a WEM platform targeted to

enterprise-level organizations.

• SDL reports a 99% customer retention rate with a partner

network of 400.

Overview

• SDL’s product is great for global organizations. It is able to tailor

the product based on location, keying into local language and

culture, and still maintain the global brand.

• SDL also leverages profile information gained from how visitors

are coming to the site and their behavior while on the website to

deliver dynamic content.

Strengths

• The base capabilities of SDL’s campaign management module

are limited in comparison to its primary competitors.

• SDL’s SM2 Social Intelligence module provides insight into user

interaction and behavior. This functionality is not, however, a

core part of the SDL Tridion platform.

Challenges

The vendor declined to provide pricing, and


$1 $1M+

http://www.sdl.com/


Multi-channel support has been in SDL’s DNA from the beginning

Features


SDL is a strong contender for global organizations. It is able to maintain global branding as well as

manage brand variances for different regions.

Vendor Landscape

“Tridion excels for organizations with a great deal of localization/translation

requirements or for companies that have large numbers of sites to manage. I think

their offering is a great fit in environments where you need to manage multiple sites

but need to reuse content, taxonomy, or structure across the sites.

Tony Rems, Managing Partner/Owner, ThoughtMatrix

“Due to their flexibility and expandability, [there is] a greater level of complexity in

implementing. Unfortunately, the documentation is limited, unlike some of the simpler

and cheaper WCM systems out on the market.

Anonymous, CEO of developer company


Product Vendor


Social

media

Social

market. Search

Multi-

channel Analytics

Content

tailoring

Camp.

Admin. Mobile

Cross

platform

N/A Value Index

The vendor declined to provide pricing,

and publicly available pricing could not be

found


Product:

Employees:

Headquarters:

Website:

Founded:

Presence:

Oracle WebCenter

~85,000

Redwood City, CA

oracle.com

1977

NASDAQ: ORCL

Through acquisition Oracle has ramped up their WEM offering and become a contender

Emerging Player • Founded in 1977, Oracle is a large vendor with multiple

software and hardware products.

• With the acquisition of FatWire Software in 2011, Oracle has

made improvements to its WEM offering.

Overview

• WebCenter has the ability to delivery dynamic content to mobile

devices, as well as support the creation of native mobile apps.

• WebCenter now allows users to create pages in a visual way.

Content can be dragged and dropped into the context of the

webpage.

• Social login and visitor sharing to Facebook and Twitter are

available out-of-the-box. This functionality can be extended to

20+ social platforms through Jainrain integration.

Strengths

• WebCenter lacks the ability to pull visitors’ information from

external social sites and deliver targeted content based on the

customer information gained.

• Sentiment analysis is not an available feature.

• The multichannel support does not extend to include print

materials.

Challenges


tier 8, between $250,000 and $500,000

$1 $1M+

Pricing solicited from public sources

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/middleware/webcenter/suite/overview/index.html


Oracle delivers customized content based on user activity, but lacks the ability to pull additional information from social sites

Features


Organizations that are currently invested in Oracle products may consider WebCenter to extend their

existing CRM and ERP solutions.

Vendor Landscape

“FatWire was certainly well rated as a leading solution in the web experience

management market in early 2011 and now that Oracle has acquired them, it is more

than likely that it will be a very strong element of their web experience management

platform.

Anonymous

“Oracle has acquired several large well-rated CMS solutions and should be

dominating the market... they're not.

Anonymous


Product Vendor


Social

media

Social

market. Search

Multi-

channel Analytics

Content

tailoring

Camp.

Admin. Mobile

Cross

platform

9 6th out of 8

Value Index


The Info-Tech WEM Vendor Shortlist Tool is designed to generate a

customized shortlist of vendors based on your key priorities.

Identify leading candidates with the Web Experience Management (WEM) Vendor Shortlist Tool

• Overall Vendor vs. Product Weightings

• Individual product criteria weightings:

Features

Usability

Affordability

Architecture

• Individual vendor criteria weightings:

Viability

Strategy

Reach

Channel

This tool offers the ability to modify:

http://www.infotech.com/research/it-web-experience-management-vendor-shortlist-tool

http://www.infotech.com/research/it-web-experience-management-vendor-shortlist-tool


Global organizations with vastly different target groups must be able to

automatically deliver context-appropriate content and branding.

The maintenance of a global brand is important, especially when the brand may mean different things in different regions

Why Scenarios?

In reviewing the products included

in each Vendor LandscapeTM ,

certain use-cases come to the

forefront. Whether those use-cases

are defined by applicability in

certain locations, relevance for

certain industries, or as strengths in

delivering a specific capability, Info-

Tech recognizes those use-cases

as Scenarios, and calls attention to

them where they exist.

3 2

Global brand management 1

For an explanation of how Scenarios are determined, see Information Presentation – Scenarios in the Appendix.

Exemplary Performers

Viable Performers

Adequate Performers


Media based websites must be able to automatically deliver a variety of

content that specifically meets users’ needs and interests.

Organizations that want to engage website visitors must have the ability to deliver the right content at the right time

Why Scenarios?












3

1

Multi-media content

delivery 2

For an explanation of how Scenarios are determined, see Information Presentation – Scenarios in the Appendix.


Viable Performers

Adequate Performers


Organizations that want an on-going conversation with customers need a

solution that manages campaigns across social, print, and web channels.

The support of multi-channel delivery is necessary to provide customers with a fluid experience across all points of contact

Why Scenarios?













Viable Performers

Adequate Performers

2 1

Multi-channel campaign

management 3

For an explanation of how Scenarios are determined, see Information Presentation – Scenarios the Appendix.


Appendix

1. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Overview

2. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Product Selection & Information Gathering

3. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Scoring

4. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation

5. Vendor Landscape Methodology: Fact Check & Publication

6. Product Pricing Scenario


Vendor Landscape Methodology: Overview

Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscapes are research materials that review a particular IT market space, evaluating the strengths and abilities of both

the products available in that space, as well as the vendors of those products. These materials are created by a team of dedicated analysts

operating under the direction of a senior subject matter expert over a period of six weeks.

Evaluations weigh selected vendors and their products (collectively “solutions”) on the following eight criteria to determine overall standing:

• Features: The presence of advanced and market-differentiating capabilities.

• Usability: The intuitiveness, power, and integrated nature of administrative consoles and client software components.

• Affordability: The three-year total cost of ownership of the solution.

• Architecture: The degree of integration with the vendor’s other tools, flexibility of deployment, and breadth of platform applicability.

• Viability: The stability of the company as measured by its history in the market, the size of its client base, and its financial performance.

• Strategy: The commitment to both the market-space, as well as to the various sized clients (small, mid-sized, and enterprise clients).

• Reach: The ability of the vendor to support its products on a global scale.

• Channel: The measure of the size of the vendor’s channel partner program, as well as any channel strengthening strategies.

Evaluated solutions are plotted on a standard two by two matrix:

• Champions: Both the product and the vendor receive scores that are above the average score for the evaluated group.

• Innovators: The product receives a score that is above the average score for the evaluated group, but the vendor receives a score that is

below the average score for the evaluated group.

• Market Pillars: The product receives a score that is below the average score for the evaluated group, but the vendor receives a score that

is above the average score for the evaluated group.

• Emerging Players: Both the product and the vendor receive scores that are below the average score for the evaluated group.

Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscapes are researched and produced according to a strictly adhered to process that includes the following steps:

• Vendor/product selection

• Information gathering

• Vendor/product scoring

• Information presentation

• Fact checking

• Publication

This document outlines how each of these steps is conducted.


Vendor Landscape Methodology: Vendor/Product Selection & Information Gathering

Info-Tech works closely with its client base to solicit guidance in terms of understanding the vendors with whom clients wish to work and the

products that they wish evaluated; this demand pool forms the basis of the vendor selection process for Vendor Landscapes. Balancing this

demand, Info-Tech also relies upon the deep subject matter expertise and market awareness of its Senior and Lead Research Analysts to

ensure that appropriate solutions are included in the evaluation. As an aspect of that expertise and awareness, Info-Tech’s analysts may, at

their discretion, determine the specific capabilities that are required of the products under evaluation, and include in the Vendor Landscape

only those solutions that meet all specified requirements.

Information on vendors and products is gathered in a number of ways via a number of channels.

Initially, a request package is submitted to vendors to solicit information on a broad range of topics. The request package includes:

• A detailed survey.

• A pricing scenario (see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Price Evaluation and Pricing Scenario, below).

• A request for reference clients.

• A request for a briefing and, where applicable, guided product demonstration.

These request packages are distributed approximately twelve weeks prior to the initiation of the actual research project to allow vendors ample

time to consolidate the required information and schedule appropriate resources.

During the course of the research project, briefings and demonstrations are scheduled (generally for one hour each session, though more time

is scheduled as required) to allow the analyst team to discuss the information provided in the survey, validate vendor claims, and gain direct

exposure to the evaluated products. Additionally, an end-user survey is circulated to Info-Tech’s client base and vendor-supplied reference

accounts are interviewed to solicit their feedback on their experiences with the evaluated solutions and with the vendors of those solutions.

These materials are supplemented by a thorough review of all product briefs, technical manuals, and publicly available marketing materials

about the product, as well as about the vendor itself.

Refusal by a vendor to supply completed surveys or submit to participation in briefings and demonstrations does not eliminate a vendor from

inclusion in the evaluation. Where analyst and client input has determined that a vendor belongs in a particular evaluation, it will be evaluated

as best as possible based on publicly available materials only. As these materials are not as comprehensive as a survey, briefing, and

demonstration, the possibility exists that the evaluation may not be as thorough or accurate. Since Info-Tech includes vendors regardless of

vendor participation, it is always in the vendor’s best interest to participate fully.

All information is recorded and catalogued, as required, to facilitate scoring and for future reference.


Vendor Landscape Methodology: Scoring

Once all information has been gathered and evaluated for all vendors and products, the analyst team moves to scoring. All scoring is

performed at the same time so as to ensure as much consistency as possible. Each criterion is scored on a ten point scale, though the manner

of scoring for criteria differs slightly:

• Features is scored via Cumulative Scoring

• Affordability is scored via Scalar Scoring

• All other criteria are scored via Base5 Scoring

In Cumulative Scoring, a single point is assigned to each evaluated feature that is regarded as being fully present, a half point to each feature

that is partially present or pending in an upcoming release, and zero points to features that are deemed to be absent. The assigned points are

summed and normalized to a value out of ten. For example, if a particular Vendor Landscape evaluates eight specific features in the Feature

Criteria, the summed score out of eight for each evaluated product would be multiplied by 1.25 to yield a value out of ten.

In Scalar Scoring, a score of ten is assigned to the lowest cost solution, and a score of one is assigned to the highest cost solution. All other

solutions are assigned a mathematically determined score based on their proximity to / distance from these two endpoints. For example, in an

evaluation of three solutions, where the middle cost solution is closer to the low end of the pricing scale it will receive a higher score, and

where it is closer to the high end of the pricing scale it will receive a lower score; depending on proximity to the high or low price it is entirely

possible that it could receive either ten points (if it is very close to the lowest price) or one point (if it is very close to the highest price). Where

pricing cannot be determined (vendor does not supply price and public sources do not exist), a score of 0 is automatically assigned.

In Base5 scoring a number of sub-criteria are specified for each criterion (for example, Longevity, Market Presence, and Financials are sub-

criteria of the Viability criterion), and each one is scored on the following scale:

5 - The product/vendor is exemplary in this area (nothing could be done to improve the status).

4 - The product/vendor is good in this area (small changes could be made that would move things to the next level).

3 - The product/vendor is adequate in this area (small changes would make it good, more significant changes required to be exemplary).

2 - The product/vendor is poor in this area (this is a notable weakness and significant work is required).

1 - The product/vendor is terrible/fails in this area (this is a glaring oversight and a serious impediment to adoption).

The assigned points are summed and normalized to a value out of ten as explained in Cumulative Scoring above.

Scores out of ten, known as Raw scores, are transposed as-is into Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscape Shortlist Tool, which automatically

determines Vendor Landscape positioning (see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation - Vendor Landscape, below),

Criteria Score (see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation - Criteria Score, below), and Value Index (see Vendor

Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation - Value Index, below).


Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Vendor Landscape

Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscape is a two-by-two matrix that plots solutions based on the

combination of Product score and Vendor score. Placement is not determined by

absolute score, but instead by relative score. Relative scores are used to ensure a

consistent view of information and to minimize dispersion in nascent markets, while

enhancing dispersion in commodity markets to allow for quick visual analysis by clients.

Relative scores are calculated as follows:

1. Raw scores are transposed into the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape Shortlist Tool

(for information on how Raw scores are determined, see Vendor Landscape

Methodology: Scoring, above).

2. Each individual criterion Raw score is multiplied by the pre-assigned weighting

factor for the Vendor Landscape in question. Weighting factors are determined

prior to the evaluation process to eliminate any possibility of bias. Weighting

factors are expressed as a percentage such that the sum of the weighting factors

for the Vendor criteria (Viability, Strategy, Reach, Channel) is 100% and the sum

of the Product criteria (Features, Usability, Affordability, Architecture) is 100%.

3. A sum-product of the weighted Vendor criteria scores and of the weighted Product

criteria scores is calculated to yield an overall Vendor score and an overall Product

score.

4. Overall Vendor scores are then normalized to a 20 point scale by calculating the

arithmetic mean and standard deviation of the pool of Vendor scores. Vendors for

whom their overall Vendor score is higher than the arithmetic mean will receive a

normalized Vendor score of 11-20 (exact value determined by how much higher

than the arithmetic mean their overall Vendor score is), while vendors for whom

their overall Vendor score is lower than the arithmetic mean will receive a

normalized Vendor score of between one and ten (exact value determined by how

much lower than the arithmetic mean their overall Vendor score is).

5. Overall Product score is normalized to a 20 point scale according to the same

process.

6. Normalized scores are plotted on the matrix, with Vendor score being used as the

x-axis, and Product score being used as the y-axis.

Vendor Landscape

Champions:

solutions with above

average Vendor

scores and above

average Product

scores.

Innovators:

solutions with below

average Vendor

scores and above

average Product

scores.

Market Pillars:

solutions with above

average Vendor

scores and below

average Product

scores.

Emerging Players:

solutions with below

average Vendor

scores and below

average Product

scores.


Harvey Balls

Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Criteria Scores (Harvey Balls) Info-Tech’s Criteria Scores are visual representations of the absolute score assigned to each individual criterion, as well as of the calculated

overall Vendor and Product scores. The visual representation used is Harvey Balls.

Harvey Balls are calculated as follows:

1. Raw scores are transposed into the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape Shortlist Tool (for information on how Raw scores are determined, see

Vendor Landscape Methodology: Scoring, above).

2. Each individual criterion Raw score is multiplied by a pre-assigned weighting factor for the Vendor Landscape in question. Weighting

factors are determined prior to the evaluation process, based on the expertise of the Senior or Lead Research Analyst, to eliminate any

possibility of bias. Weighting factors are expressed as a percentage, such that the sum of the weighting factors for the Vendor criteria

(Viability, Strategy, Reach, Channel) is 100%, and the sum of the Product criteria (Features, Usability, Affordability, Architecture) is

100%.

3. A sum-product of the weighted Vendor criteria scores and of the weighted Product criteria scores is calculated to yield an overall Vendor

score and an overall Product score.

4. Both overall Vendor score / overall Product score, as well as individual criterion Raw scores are converted from a scale of one to ten to

Harvey Ball scores on a scale of zero to four, where exceptional performance results in a score of four and poor performance results in a

score of zero.

5. Harvey Ball scores are converted to Harvey Balls as follows:

• A score of four becomes a full Harvey Ball.

• A score of three becomes a three-quarter full Harvey Ball.

• A score of two becomes a half full Harvey Ball.

• A score of one becomes a one-quarter full Harvey Ball.

• A score of zero (zero) becomes an empty Harvey Ball.

6. Harvey Balls are plotted by solution in a chart where rows represent individual solutions and columns represent overall Vendor / overall

Product, as well as individual criteria. Solutions are ordered in the chart alphabetically by vendor name.

Product Vendor


Overall Harvey

Balls represent

weighted

aggregates.

Criteria Harvey

Balls represent

individual Raw

scores.


Stop Lights

Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Feature Ranks (Stop Lights)

Info-Tech’s Feature Ranks are visual representations of the presence/availability of individual features that collectively comprise the Features’

criterion. The visual representation used is Stop Lights.

Stop Lights are determined as follows:

1. A single point is assigned to each evaluated feature that is regarded as being fully present, a partial point to each feature that is partially

present or pending in an upcoming release, and zero points to features that are deemed to be fully absent.

• Fully present means all aspects and capabilities of the feature as described are in evidence.

• Fully absent means all aspects and capabilities of the feature as described are in evidence.

• Partially present means some, but not all, aspects and capabilities of the feature as described are in evidence, OR all aspects and

capabilities of the feature as described are in evidence, but only for some models in a line.

• Pending means all aspects and capabilities of the feature, as described, are anticipated to be in evidence in a future revision of the

product and that revision is to be released within the next 12 months.

2. Feature scores are converted to Stop Lights as follows:

• Full points become a Green light.

• Half points become a Yellow light.

• Quarter points or less become a Red light.

3. Stop Lights are plotted by solution in a chart where rows represent individual solutions and columns represent individual features.

Solutions are ordered in the chart alphabetically by vendor name.

For example, a set of applications is being reviewed and a feature of “Integration with Mobile Devices” that is defined as “availability of

dedicated mobile device applications for iOS, Android, and BlackBerry devices” is specified. Solution A provides such apps for all listed

platforms and scores “Green”, solution B provides apps for iOS and Android only and scores “Yellow”, while solution C provides mobile device

functionality through browser extensions, has no dedicated apps, and so scores “Red”.

Feature 1 Feature 2 Feature 4 Feature 5 Feature 3

Features

Feature 6 Feature 7 Feature 8

Yellow shows

partial availability

(such as in some

models in a line).

Green means a

feature is fully

present; Red,

unsatisfactory or

fully absent.


Value Index

Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Value Index

Info-Tech’s Value Index is an indexed ranking of solution value per dollar as determined

by the Raw scores assigned to each criteria (for information on how Raw scores are

determined, see Vendor Landscape Methodology: Scoring, above).

Value scores are calculated as follows:

1. The Affordability criterion is removed from the overall Product score and the

remaining Product score criteria (Features, Usability, Architecture) are reweighted

so as to retain the same weightings relative to one another, while still summing to

100%. For example, if all four Product criteria were assigned base weightings of

25%, for the determination of the Value score, Features, Usability, and

Architecture would be reweighted to 33.3% each to retain the same relative

weightings while still summing to 100%.

2. A sum-product of the weighted Vendor criteria scores and of the reweighted

Product criteria scores is calculated to yield an overall Vendor score and a

reweighted overall Product score.

3. The overall Vendor score and the reweighted overall Product score are then

summed, and this sum is multiplied by the Affordability Raw score to yield an

interim Value score for each solution.

4. All interim Value scores are then indexed to the highest performing solution by

dividing each interim Value score by the highest interim Value score. This results

in a Value score of 100 for the top solution and an indexed Value score relative to

the 100 for each alternate solution.

5. Solutions are plotted according to Value score, with the highest score plotted first,

and all remaining scores plotted in descending numerical order.

Where pricing is not provided by the vendor and public sources of information cannot be

found, an Affordability Raw score of zero is assigned. Since multiplication by zero results

in a product of zero, those solutions for which pricing cannot be determined receive a

Value score of zero. Since Info-Tech assigns a score of zero where pricing is not

available, it is always in the vendor’s best interest to provide accurate and up to date

pricing

Those solutions that are ranked as

Champions are differentiated for point of

reference.

E

10

D

30

C

40

B

80

A

100 Average Score: 52

Vendors are arranged in order of Value Score.

The Value Score each solution achieved is

displayed, and so is the average score.


Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Price Evaluation

Info-Tech’s Price Evaluation is a tiered representation of the three year Total Cost of

Ownership (TCO) of a proposed solution. Info-Tech uses this method of communicating

pricing information to provide high-level budgetary guidance to its end-user clients while

respecting the privacy of the vendors with whom it works. The solution TCO is calculated

and then represented as belonging to one of ten pricing tiers.

Pricing tiers are as follows:

1. Between $1 and $2,500

2. Between $2,500 and $5,000

3. Between $5,000 and $10,000

4. Between $10,000 and $25,000

5. Between $25,000 and $50,000

6. Between $50,000 and $100,000

7. Between $100,000 and $250,000

8. Between $250,000 and $500,000

9. Between $500,000 and $1,000,000

10. Greater than $1,000,000

Where pricing is not provided, Info-Tech makes use of publicly available sources of

information to determine a price. As these sources are not official price lists, the

possibility exists that they may be inaccurate or outdated, and so the source of the

pricing information is provided. Since Info-Tech publishes pricing information regardless

of vendor participation, it is always in the vendor’s best interest to supply accurate and

up to date information.

Info-Tech’s Price Evaluations are based on pre-defined pricing scenarios (see Product

Pricing Scenario, below) to ensure a comparison that is as close as possible between

evaluated solutions. Pricing scenarios describe a sample business and solicit guidance

as to the appropriate product/service mix required to deliver the specified functionality,

the list price for those tools/services, as well as three full years of maintenance and

support.

Price Evaluation

Call-out bubble indicates within which price

tier the three year TCO for the solution falls,

provides the brackets of that price tier, and

links to the graphical representation.

Scale along the bottom indicates that the

graphic as a whole represents a price scale

with a range of $1 to $1M+, while the notation

indicates whether the pricing was supplied by

the vendor or derived from public sources.


tier 6, between $50,000 and $100,000.

$1 $1M+

Pricing solicited from public sources.


Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Scenarios

Info-Tech’s Scenarios highlight specific use cases for the evaluated solution to provide as complete (when taken in conjunction with the

individual written review, Vendor Landscape, Criteria Scores, Feature Ranks, and Value Index) a basis for comparison by end-user clients as

possible.

Scenarios are designed to reflect tiered capability in a particular set of circumstances. Determination of the Scenarios in question is at the

discretion of the analyst team assigned to the research project. Where possible, Scenarios are designed to be mutually exclusive and

collectively exhaustive, or at the very least, hierarchical such that the tiers within the Scenario represent a progressively greater or broader

capability.

Scenario ranking is determined as follows:

1. The analyst team determines an appropriate use case.

For example:

• Clients that have multinational presence and require vendors to provide four hour onsite support.

2. The analyst team establishes the various tiers of capability.

For example:

• Presence in Americas

• Presence in EMEA

• Presence in APAC

3. The analyst team reviews all evaluated solutions and determines which ones meet which tiers of capability.

For example:

• Presence in Americas – Vendor A, Vendor C, Vendor E

• Presence in EMEA – Vendor A, Vendor B, Vendor C

• Presence in APAC – Vendor B, Vendor D, Vendor E

4. Solutions are plotted on a grid alphabetically by vendor by tier. Where one vendor is deemed to be stronger in a tier than other vendors in

the same tier, they may be plotted non-alphabetically.

For example:

• Vendor C is able to provide four hour onsite support to 12 countries in EMEA while Vendors A and B are only able to provide four hour

onsite support to eight countries in EMEA; Vendor C would be plotted first, followed by Vendor A, then Vendor B.


Vendor Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Vendor Awards

At the conclusion of all analyses, Info-Tech presents awards to exceptional solutions in

three distinct categories. Award presentation is discretionary; not all awards are

extended subsequent to each Vendor landscape and it is entirely possible, though

unlikely, that no awards may be presented.

Awards categories are as follows:

• Champion Awards are presented to those solutions, and only those solutions, that

land in the Champion zone of the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape (see Vendor

Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation - Vendor Landscape, above). If

no solutions land in the Champion zone, no Champion Awards are presented.

Similarly, if multiple solutions land in the Champion zone, multiple Champion Awards

are presented.

• Trend Setter Awards are presented to those solutions, and only those solutions,

that are deemed to include the most original/inventive product/service, or the most

original/inventive feature/capability of a product/service. If no solution is deemed to

be markedly or sufficiently original/inventive, either as a product/service on the

whole or by feature/capability specifically, no Trend Setter Award is presented. Only

one Trend Setter Award is available for each Vendor Landscape.

• Best Overall Value Awards are presented to those solutions, and only those

solutions, that are ranked highest on the Info-Tech Value Index (see Vendor

Landscape Methodology: Information Presentation – Value Index, above). If

insufficient pricing information is made available for the evaluated solutions, such

that a Value Index cannot be calculated, no Best Overall Value Award will be

presented. Only one Best Overall Value Award is available for each Vendor

Landscape.

Vendor Awards

Info-Tech’s Champion

Award is presented to

solutions in the Champion

zone of the Vendor

Landscape.

Info-Tech’s Trend Setter

Award is presented to the

most original/inventive

solution evaluated.

Info-Tech’s Best Overall

Value Award is

presented to the solution

with the highest Value

Index score.


Vendor Landscape Methodology: Fact Check & Publication

Info-Tech takes the factual accuracy of its Vendor Landscapes, and indeed of all of its published content, very seriously. To ensure the utmost

accuracy in its Vendor Landscapes, we invite all vendors of evaluated solutions (whether the vendor elected to provide a survey and/or

participate in a briefing or not) to participate in a process of Fact Check.

Once the research project is complete and the materials are deemed to be in a publication ready state, excerpts of the material specific to each

vendor’s solution are provided to the vendor. Info-Tech only provides material specific to the individual vendor’s solution for review

encompassing the following:

• All written review materials of the vendor and the vendor’s product that comprise the evaluated solution.

• Info-Tech’s Criteria Scores / Harvey Balls detailing the individual and overall Vendor / Product scores assigned.

• Info-Tech’s Feature Rank / Stop Lights detailing the individual feature scores of the evaluated product.

• Info-Tech’s Value Index ranking for the evaluated solution.

• Info-Tech’s Scenario ranking for all considered scenarios for the evaluated solution.

Info-Tech does not provide the following:

• Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscape placement of the evaluated solution.

• Info-Tech’s Value Score for the evaluated solution.

• End-user feedback gathered during the research project.

• Info-Tech’s overall recommendation in regard to the evaluated solution.

Info-Tech provides a one-week window for each vendor to provide written feedback. Feedback must be corroborated (be provided with

supporting evidence), and where it does, feedback that addresses factual errors or omissions is adopted fully, while feedback that addresses

opinions is taken under consideration. The assigned analyst team makes all appropriate edits and supplies an edited copy of the materials to

the vendor within one week for final review.

Should a vendor still have concerns or objections at that time, they are invited to a conversation, initially via email, but as required and deemed

appropriate by Info-Tech, subsequently via telephone, to ensure common understanding of the concerns. Where concerns relate to ongoing

factual errors or omissions they are corrected under the supervision of Info-Tech’s Vendor Relations personnel. Where concerns relate to

ongoing differences of opinion they are again taken under consideration with neither explicit not implicit indication of adoption.

Publication of materials is scheduled to occur within the six weeks immediately following the completion of the research project, but does not

occur until the Fact Check process has come to conclusion, and under no circumstances are “pre-publication” copies of any materials made

available to any client.


Product Pricing Scenario

An organization is looking to implement Web Experience Management (WEM). We are defining WEM as having, at a minimum, the ability to

deliver dynamic content and relay user data to be used as part of marketing’s ongoing campaigns. WEM is also known as Customer

Experience Management (CEM, CXM). The purpose of the project is to help the marketing department create and manage content. The

organization supports three sites (English, French, and Spanish) and the 16 content editors/creators are located in two different

geographical locations. The website is used primarily for marketing purposes and contains content created and managed by other

enterprise applications (e.g., product information).

The expected solution capabilities are as follows:

• The solution must support site creation and maintenance.

• Support for web page and content editing.

• Allow object level control of site content based on user profile, predictive analytics or click-through patterns.

• Have web site use analytics module as part of the solution or connector to named Marketing Analytics vendors.

• Module or third party vendor for aligning web content with social campaigns (Twitter, Facebook, etc).

• Basic workflow to support multi-site creation, editing, and distribution of content.

• Gold level support services should include the following:

◦ Implementation support

◦ Technical documentation and guides

◦ 24/7 Technical support by phone or online

• Include the cost of third-party database if required (e.g., Oracle, SQL Server, etc.).

• Include cost of additional licenses where third party modules as part of the WEM solution.

• Do not include licensing cost for server operating systems.

• Provide description of priced deployment model (e.g., SaaS, hosted, on-prem, etc.).

Documents

Vendor Landscape: Web Experience ManagementInfo-Tech Research Group 5 Web Experience Management Vendor selection / knock-out criteria: market share, mind share, and platform coverage