128
Quality & Regulatory Network LLC Copyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 2: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

SPECIAL SPONSORSHIP BY

2Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Page 3: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INTRODUCTION

3Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

The purpose of this survey was to collect data from companies on enabling technology currently used to

support key areas of their Quality Management System.

Data was collected from the LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network group representing over 109,000

professionals worldwide. Over 400 members from multiple industries participated.

Percentages do not reflect data for market size, vendor market share or leadership

position. Data only reflects vendor selections from survey participants.

Listing of all Software Vendors mentioned by participants in this survey can be found in the Appendix. Not all

vendors may be represented in their category. If you are a Vendor that is not currently on our list, we welcome

the chance to have you participate in the 2017 QMS Vendors Benchmark Survey.

Any questions about this Survey can be sent to Nikki Willett, Founder/Owner LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory

Network.

The Quality & Regulatory Network would like to thank our helpers in creating the base report. I would also like

to give special recognition and thanks to my Partners C.M. Schramm and Bob Mehta for their on-going support

and help in getting this report finished. I couldn’t do this without their expertise, dedication and quality control.

Thank you Clare and Bob!

LinkedIn, the LinkedIn logo, the IN logo and InMail are registered trademarks or trademarks of LinkedIn Corporation and its affiliates in

the United States and/or other countries. All other references to company and product names are copyright in their own right.

Page 4: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

SPECIAL THANK YOU TO OUR 2016 SPONSORS

4Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

A very big thank you to our PlatinumSponsor, Arena Solutions, and all of our sponsors – Gold, Silver and Bronze. Your kind support allows us the resources to research, analyze and finalize the QMS Benchmark Report. An additional thank you goes out to our media sponsors helping us to announce the Survey Launch and Final Report availability. Thanks again!Cognizant MedVantage

Cybermetrics

FormPipe

MasterControl

Motto Systems

Traction Software

PLATINUM SPONSOR

BRONZE SPONSORS

SILVER SPONSORS

GOLD SPONSORS

MEDIA SPONSORS

Page 5: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR 2016

Demographics - Industry

Not surprising that the Life Sciences (Biotech, Medical Device, Pharmaceuticals) industry maintains the leadership position in responding to the Survey as thy are the most vocal in the LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network group. However, we are seeing growth in other industries such as Laboratories potentially impacted by Health Care regulations or threat to move control under FDA.

With the growing complexity of global regulatory changes and their impact on Quality, larger companies are trying to improve their visibility across the entire enterprise by consolidating and standardizing on a single QMS platform. More large and boutique consulting firms are now recognizing that Quality and its QMS software are taking a more prominent role in the supply chain with enterprise system implementations. Not quite an ERP implementation complexity, but the paradigm shift from easily managed site “antiquated” systems and paper-based models are causing challenges in enterprise-wide cultural adoption that change and automation are a “good thing.” Greater facilitation and leadership support will be greatly needed to see the change in the Quality Maturity to the next level.

Demographics - Company Size / Revenue

Half of the participants were from small companies with revenues less than 100M. The interest in deciding on keeping paper or starting with automation as they progress to their first product submissions is high on the minds of these companies. Although low in funding for automation, many of these companies are seeing the benefits of starting automation now, such as Document Management, to set the structure of the company before it becomes wild and crazy with barely a breath to stop and consider trying to fit in an electronic system implementation. These small companies are ideal to leverage the technology, sustainability and cost of Cloud-based solutions.

Demographics – Survey Participants

More than 80% of the (blind) participants took this survey for the first time. Some participants may have not taken the survey again has things had not changed from previous years. To be more accurate in our figures, we are looking at ways for prior participants to easily state that the new year hasn’t really changed.

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

5

Page 6: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR 2016Functional Categories – Vendor Profiles

A plethora of vendors were selected for each of the categories, as seen in the charts. These may be a result of companies having more than one system and therefore doing a multi-selection or the result of the new Cloud-born solutions representing the smaller companies embracing the technology into their overall growth plan. A few of these vendors listed last year are no longer with usshowing us only the strong survive or get acquired.

Some Feedback from Participants Concerning their System of Use:• Licensing costs for companies consolidating into one instance for the enterprise• Companies need to stay on top of the vendor during implementation• Length of time some systems take to get up and running• Global use is hindered by time zone issues• Consolidation, migration and cultural adoption• Workflow process is complex to configure and maintain• Challenge or lack of interfaces to other manufacturing and document management systems• Standard QMS does not work well with contract manufacturers• Need better interface between call center system and complaint handling solution. Vendor does not have good business sense of

different call types.• Need guide for country jurisdiction and regulations of complaints globally• Many solutions not providing OOS especially for lab• Not all QMS systems connect well with GMP Training System• Support outside the client time zone• Validation challenges• Cost is high• User interface is not intuitive• Not impressed with Top IT provider GxP capabilities and understanding business needs

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

6

Page 7: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR 2016

Most of the comments were focused on the difficulty of implementation, especially global, working with the software vendor and finally costs. Larger companies are maturing and through M&As have the need to consolidate all their systems into a single enterprise instance. With that comes the cost not just from the vendor, but the internal costs spent on having dedicated resources from IT and especially business throughout the entire project. Vendors need guidance and may not understand the terminology of the business. Complexities like data migration, multiple integration, master data and archivingare all things that need to be planned upfront before finding out too late additional requirements and complexities that justpop up.

Some solutions like Calibration and SPC especially at a plant site, although critical to the overall manufacturing process, is not the highest priority in converting to an automated solution and hence many are still using manual processes (including index cards). The interest from quality and manufacturing engineers is high to help reduce work overload, but the progress is slow.Most are satisfied if they move to the functionality contained within their ERP or just tracking solutions provided by QMS software vendors.

Complaint handling and CAPA may be the ones that have more complex process of all the functional areas, but after all a CAPA is a CAPA. However, those organizations that try to replicate their paper-based processes, may just find the things that weren’t working before in a manual process are still not working when automated. This is because companies are trying to automate every detail for every type of workflow around each specific product class, country, and other attributes, or are trying to force-fit functionality into a software solution not built for it. Each approach causes complexity and typically results in a user interface that is not intuitive especially for infrequent users. Customization or lengthy configurations will also make the cost higher for implementation and maintenance. Good rule is 80% out-of-the-box and 20% formatting changes or additional configuration. Lastly, with the changing global regulatory landscape, companies not only need to think of country jurisdiction when a complaint occurs but bring regulatory into the fold of manufacturing release so the right product is released to the right country at the right time.

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

7

Page 8: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR 2016

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

8

LIMS and MES still appear to have automation adoption challenges. A lot of companies are using manual processes in the lab or on the shop floor. Although a lot of opportunity for growth, typically there is no clear strategy for automation or integration with other systems. Batch records are still predominantly paper-based, a risk for accuracy and compliance, and you can still find rooms filled with locked cabinets.

Still considered a relatively new idea in some industries, we’ve seen changes recently with PLM. In the past, PLM was owned by Development/Engineering. However, since Quality is across the entire product value chain we are now seeing many organization shift the ownership to Quality resulting in PLM vendors adding more functionality to support product quality lifecycle. Although on the rise, many companies still lack a PLM and try to make up for it by using many different systems – adding to the complexity for their users.

It’s not surprising to hear that Top IT providers implementing quality solutions do not have impressive GxP capabilities nor understand the business. SMEs with a background in GMP, Validation, Quality and how it’s applied with Vendor Software are the ones that can provide guidance to an IT provider during a project implementation. This role is critical to any QMS implementation success. But do not think that all delivery people whether on-shore or off-shore will have this kind of knowledge except for what they hear when on-boarded to the project.

Page 9: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS FOR 2016Technology Trends

Last year there were a greater number of participants saying they had no cloud-based solutions within their organization. This year is 50% less. Although Cloud technologies increasingly become mainstream, only 30% of respondents think Cloud is a positive trend for Quality Management Systems. While many organizations embrace Cloud, security and regulatory compliance concerns are a limiting factor to broader adoption. Lack of GAMP and FDA guidelines for SaaS and Cloud-based systems are also a major concern.

Although Cloud and security was mentioned many times, the biggest trends that participants are watching are Mobility and DigitalTransformation

Other Observations – Years Used, Satisfaction, Installation, Implementation

Most participants said they have been using their systems from 1-3 years and only a small portion had something implemented within the last year. As companies may evaluate their software lifecycle from 3-5 years, we might see an uptick in new system acquisitions especially for CAPA, nonconformances and deviations especially on the shop floor and replacing old or adding new document management systems. The uptick in Document Management can be either small companies embracing automation or a plethora of lower cost Cloud solutions being available.

For the most part, even seeing issues and challenges with their system and vendor as part of the survey feedback, participants mostly felt good about their QMS system.

Companies are still trying to everything themselves including implementing QMS systems with some help from the vendor. This approach may be overwhelming to IT and especially to Business and may cause a company to miss out on the benefits of leading practices that both a software vendor and service providers can provide from vast experience with customers. Over run projects, difficulties keeping to schedules is not the fault of internal resources nor vendors, but the lack of having resources dedicating time to a project.

Consideration on external resources may be need to help drive the strategy and roadmap before jumping directly into a large program implementation, especially those that are enterprise-wide or have multiple business units involved.

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

9

Page 10: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

NUMBER ONE CHALLENGE

Although cost is always on the top 3 of the list of challenges in implementing a Quality system, the feedback on the number one challenge is cultural adoption. Users comfortable with paper need early training on the benefits of automation for their own job, department and company. In addition, the voice of the company needs to be heard even if implementation will be done in another phase or year. Leaders need to be very supportive and help commit to the long term investment. If culture is not considered as part of planning phase of a new Quality system, there will be greater potentials for failures.

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

10

IF YOU’RE GOING TO RISE TO

THE CHALLENGE, YOU HAVE TO

BE PREPARED TO CHANGE.

Page 11: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

Internal/External Audit

Calibration & Maintenance

CAPA (Corrective & Preventive Actions)

Change Control

Complaints

Document Management

Exceptions (Deviations, Non-conformances)

Environmental Health & Safety (EH&S)

Laboratory Management (LIMS, ELN)

Manufacturing Execution System (MES)

Product Lifecycle Management (PLM)

Statistical Process Control (SPC/PAT)

Supplier Quality

Training

SaaS / Cloud Systems Usage

Challenge in Implementation

Technology Trends Impacting QMS

Resources Needed for On-Going QMS success

Selected Comments from Participants

Appendix I –Selected Vendor Profiles

Appendix II –Vendor List

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 12: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 12Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

DEMOGRAPHICSREPRESENTATION FROM PARTICIPANTS ABOUT THEIR INDUSTRY

1.1%1.3%

1.1%

1.3%

10.5%1.3%

1.6%

11.1%

2.9%

2.6%

2.1%

1.3%1.6%

12.4%10.3%

1.8%

21.1%

3.4% 11.2%

Academic Research

Aerospace & Defense

Airlines / Aviation

Automotive

Biotechnology

Chemicals

Contract Partner

Consulting

Electrical & Electronic Manufacturing

Food & Beverages

Hospital & Health Care

Information Technology & Services

Laboratory

Life Science Multi-Sector

Medical Device / Diagnostic / Software

Mining, Metals, Paper, Plastics

Pharmaceuticals

Software Vendor for QMS

Other

Bio

Med

Pharma

Life Science

Multi-Sector

Page 13: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF INDUSTRY TO 2015

13Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

1.1% 1.3% 1.1% 1.3%

10.5%

1.3% 1.6%

11.1%

2.9%2.6%

2.1% 1.3% 1.6%

12.4%10.3%

1.8%

21.1%

3.4%

11.2%

3.5%1.5%

12.4%

1.1%

1.3%

4.3%

3.8% 4.6%

17.6%

35.5%

14.4%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

2016 2015

Page 14: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 14Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

DEMOGRAPHICSREPRESENTATION FROM PARTICIPANTS ABOUT THEIR COMPANY ANNUAL REVENUE

M – Million B - Billion

31.8%

15.8%

8.4%

12.4%

3.7%

3.9%

10.5%

6.6%

2.9% 1.6% 2.4% less than 25M

26-50M

51-100M

101-500M

500-750M

750M-1B

1-5B

5-10B

11-25B

26-50B

Over 50B

Page 15: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF ANNUAL REVENUE TO 2015

15Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

38.4%

34.8%

8.9%

17.9%

31.8%

15.8%

8.4%

12.4%

3.7% 3.9%

10.5%

6.6%

2.9%1.6%

2.4%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

2015 2016

Page 16: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

DEMOGRAPHICSREPRESENTATION FROM PARTICIPANTS ABOUT THEIR ROLE OR FUNCTION WITHIN THE COMPANY

16Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

5.5%5.5%

2.1%

8.7%

4.5%

4.2%

39.2%

3.4%

3.4%0.5%

0.8%

1.6%

0.3%

0.5%0.3%

2.9%

16.6%

Compliance

Engineering

Exec/C-Suite

IT

Management

Manufacturing

Quality Assurance

Quality Control

Regulatory

Risk

R&D

Safety

Security

Supply Chain

Sustainability

Training / HR

Validation

Page 17: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF ROLES TO 2015

17Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Note: Some answers were consolidated under one industry while those with only

a single response were allocated to "Other."

8.2%

5.7%8.7%

3.1%

35.3%

15.4%

7.5%

0.1%

2.7%

0.6% 0.7% 0.3%

11.7%5.5%

5.5%

2.1% 8.7%

4.5%4.2%

39.2%

3.4% 3.4%0.5%

0.8%

1.6% 0.3%0.5% 0.3% 2.9%

16.6%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%2015 2016

Page 18: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

DEMOGRAPHICS 2016REPRESENTATION FROM PARTICIPANTS ABOUT THEIR GEOGRAPHICAL REGION

18Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

64.7%

1.6%

0.8%

12.6%

0.3%

2.1%

0.8% 17.1% North America

Central America

South America

Europe

Eastern Europe

Africa

Middle East

Asia Pacific

Page 19: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF GEOGRAPHICAL

REPRESENTATION TO 2015

19Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

62%

14%

20%

2% 2%

13%

64.7%

1.6% 0.8%

12.6%

0.3%

2.1%

0.8%

17.1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

NorthAmerica

CentralAmerica

SouthAmerica

Europe EasternEurope

Africa Middle East Asia Pacific

2015 2016

Page 20: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

20Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Please note that each Category has 5 parts:

• Top 2016 Vendors Selected

• Vendor list of “Other” with less than 1%

response

• Time & Satisfaction with the System

• Installation & Implementation of the System

• Comparison to the 2015 Benchmark

Page 21: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INTERNAL / EXTERNAL AUDIT SYSTEM

21

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

24%

1%

27%

1%1%

10%

4%

1%

7%

1%

3%3% 5%

2%2%

5%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

AutoSHEQ

Cebos

ETQ

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

JIRA (Atlassian)

MasterControl

Q-Pulse (Gael)

SAP

SharePoint (Microsoft)

Trackwise (Sparta Systems)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 22: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER AUDIT VENDORS*

123Compliance (Sparta Systems)

AMPLEXOR

Compliance Control

ComplianceQuest

Documentum Compliance Manager

Ennov Software Solutions

Enovia PLM (Dassault Systemes)

Formpipe.GxP (Formpipe Software AB)

Harrington Group International

HP Quality Center (QC)

IQS, Inc.

MetricStream

NextDocs

Optiva PLM (Infor)

Oracle

QA Systems (QASYS)

QAD

QPR Software PLC

Qualtrax

Qumas (Dassault Systemes)

Rescop

Salesforce

ServiceNow

22Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 23: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

4%

8%

24%

37%

28%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

20.9%

27.2%

13.7%

5.1%14.3%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

TIME SATISFACTION

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH AUDIT SYSTEM

23Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 24: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF AUDIT SYSTEM

24Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

33.7%

31.6%

2.1%

0.9%0.9%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

32.8%6.6%

8.7%

5.4%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

Page 25: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF AUDIT TO 2015

25Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

23.6%

1.2%

27.4%

1.7% 1.7%

10.1%

3.7%

0.0%1.7%

7.5%

0.9% 0.3%1.4%

3.2% 2.6%

5.5%

2.0% 2.0%

24.6%

7.1%

17.9%

0.0% 0.5%1.5%

0.7%2.1%

1.2%

6.0%

2.3% 1.8% 1.8%

4.6%3.5%

6.9%

0.3%1.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0% 2016 2015

Page 26: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

CALIBRATION & MAINTENANCE (CMMS & PM)

26

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their

organizations. Those software vendors with less than a 1% response are not reflected in the chart

but are included in the list of other Vendors.

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

21.7%

4.5%

21.3%

1.4%

3.6%4.5%

1.4%

5.4%

1.8%

5.9%

1.4%

1.8%

1.4% 4.5%

1.8%1.4% 5.9%

10.4%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

AutoSHEQ

Blue Mountain

Calman (SpectraCal)

Cebos

ETQ

GAGEtrak (CyberMetrics Corporation)

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

IQS, Inc.

JD Edwards (Oracle)

MasterControl

Maximo (IBM)

ProCAL (Prime Technologies)

Q-Pulse (Gael)

SAP

Other

Page 27: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER CALIBRATION & MAINTENANCE

VENDORS*

Access Automation (UCAL)

Ape Software

CERDAAC (Simco Electronics)

Gage Insite (Indysoft Corporation)

GageManager (Altegra)

GAGEpack (PQ Systems)

iBASEt

IBS US

Infor EAMS

LabVantage

Labware

QAD

Quality Systems Toolbox

Rescop

TrackPro

uniPoint Software

Vintara

27Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 28: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH CALIBRATION &

MAINTENANCE SYSTEM

28Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

TIME SATISFACTION

11.5%

23.4%

8.7%4.8%

31.7%

1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years Other

3%

13%

29%

32%

23%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 29: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

CALIBRATION & MAINTENANCE SYSTEM

29Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

31.7%

3.2%

4.8%

2.2%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

37.3%

37.3%

3.1%

0.3%

0.7%

21.4%

Totally InternalWorked with Software VendorUsed a local service providerUsed boutique service providerUsed top IT service providerOther

Page 30: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF CALIBRATION &

MAINTENANCE TO 2015

30Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

17.0%

3.5%

16.6%

4.6% 4.6% 4.2%3.5% 3.5%

2.8%

1.4% 1.4% 1.4%

14.4%

3.2%

0.9%1.4%

4.5%

0.9%0.2%

4.2%

8.0%

0.0%

1.7%0.9%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

2016 2015

Page 31: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

31

Sp

on

so

red

By

What else do you want to see in the 2017 QMS

Vendor Report?

Submit Now!

Page 32: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

CAPA (CORRECTIVE & PREVENTIVE ACTIONS)

32Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

16.0%2.3%

21.7%

1.0%

13.7%4.3%

1.3%

8.7%

1.0%

1.7%

1.0%

2.0%

2.3%

8.0%

2.3%

3.3%

9.3%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

AutoSHEQ

ETQ

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

IQS, Inc.

MasterControl

Pilgrim

Q-Pulse (Gael)

Qumas (Dassault Systemes)

SAP

SharePoint (Microsoft)

Trackwise (Sparta Systems)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 33: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER CAPA VENDORS*

123Compliance

Cebos

ComplianceQuest

Empower PLM (Omnify Software)

Ideagen PLC

JIRA (Atlassian)

MetricStream

Omnex

QPR Software PLC

Qualtrax

Redmine

Rescop

TeamPage (Traction Software)

uniPoint Software

33Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 34: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH CAPA SYSTEM

34Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

18.0%

35.3%

12.9%

6.1% 11.2%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

4%

8%

23%

35%

31%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 35: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF CAPA

35Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

37.3%

37.3%

3.1%

0.3%

0.7% 21.4%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

37.3%6.4%

8.5%

6.4%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

Page 36: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF CAPA SYSTEM TO 2015

36Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

14.7%

2.1%

19.9%

0.0%

12.6%

4.0%

0.0%

8.0%

0.0%1.5% 1.8% 2.1%

7.4%

2.1%3.1%

22.0%

7.1%

9.9%

1.1%2.4%

1.3% 1.1%

6.6%

1.1%

1.5% 3.3%

1.5%

11.5%

0.2% 0.7%0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

2016 2015

Page 37: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

CHANGE CONTROL

37Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

19%

3%

21%

1.0%1.3%

7%4%

1.0%1.0%

10%

1.0%

1.0%

2%

5%

1.3%2%

18%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

Agile PLM (Oracle)

AutoSHEQ

ETQ

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

IQS, Inc.

JIRA (Atlassian)

MasterControl

Qumas (Dassault Systemes)

SAP

SharePoint (Microsoft)

Trackwise (Sparta Systems)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 38: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER CHANGE CONTROL VENDORS*

Arena Solutions

Documentum (EMC)

eMatrix/Matrix One PLM (Dassault Systemes)

Enovia PLM (Dassault Systemes)

ISTM (Remedy)

QAD

Qualtrax

Remedy ARS (BMC)

Rescop

38Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 39: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH CHANGE CONTROL

SYSTEM

39Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

16.2%

28.9%

11.6%

6.1%9.7%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

4%

9%

26%

34%

27%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 40: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF CHANGE

CONTROL SYSTEM

40Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

35.2%4.2%

8.0%

5.2%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

33.0%

23.1%

1.3%

0.3% 1.0%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 41: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF CHANGE CONTROL SYSTEM

TO 2015

41Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

19.0%

3.0%

21.0%

1.0%0.3%

7.0%

4.0%

10.0%

0.0%1.0%

2.0%

5.0%

1.3%2.0%

23.6%

7.0%

10.6%

3.0%

1.3% 1.3% 1.3%

7.0%

1.5%3.0% 2.6%

10.0%

0.2% 0.7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%2016 2015

Page 42: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPLAINTS - PRODUCT QUALITY

42Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

17.2%

5.7%1.1%

23.7%

1.5%

9.2%

4.6%

1.1%

1.9%

6.5%

1.1%

1.1% 3.8%

1.9% 4.6%

1.9%2.3% 10.7%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

123Compliance (Sparta Systems)

ACE (PSC Software)

AutoSHEQ

ETQ

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

IQS, Inc.

JIRA (Atlassian)

MasterControl

Microsoft Dynamics

Pilgrim

Salesforce

SAP

Trackwise (Sparta Systems)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 43: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER PRODUCT QUALITY

COMPLAINTS VENDORS*

Aris Global

ComplianceQuest

isoTracker (Lenox Hill Ltd.)

NetRegulus (PTC)

Q-Pulse (Ideagen Plc.)

SharePoint (Microsoft)

Velocity Software

Windchill Quality Suite (PTC)

43Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 44: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH PRODUCT QUALITY

COMPLAINTS SYSTEM

44Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

TIME SATISFACTION

4%

9%

26%

34%

27%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

11.4%

21.6%

8.1%

5.1%

7.0%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

Page 45: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

2.2%

6.2%

4.0%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

PRODUCT QUALITY COMPLAINTS SYSTEM

45Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

2.8%0.3%1.4%

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 46: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF PRODUCT QUALITY

COMPLAINTS SYSTEM TO 2015

46Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

19.0%

3.0%

21.0%

1.0% 0.3%

7.0%

4.0%

10.0%

0.0%1.0%

2.0%

5.0%

1.3% 2.0%

23.6%

7.0%

10.6%

3.0%1.3% 1.3% 1.3%

7.0%

1.5%3.0% 2.6%

10.0%

0.2% 0.7%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

2016 2015

Page 47: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPLAINTS - ADVERSE EVENTS

47Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

6.2%

24.2%2.8%1.7%

9.0%

9.6%

1.7%

5.1%

1.7%2.2%

11.2%Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

Argus (Oracle)

Aris Global

ETQ

MasterControl

Pilgrim

Trackwise (Sparta Systems)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 48: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER COMPLAINTS - ADVERSE

EVENTS VENDORS*

123Compliance (Sparta Systems)

ComplianceQuest

Safefood 360

Tip Technologies

48Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 49: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH ADVERSE EVENTS

SYSTEM

49Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

TIME SATISFACTION

11.4%

21.6%

8.1%

5.1%

7.0%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

2%

10%

28%

33%

27%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 50: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

ADVERSE EVENTS SYSTEM

50Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

31.0%

1.4%0.4%

2.5%

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

32.5%4.3%

7.6%

6.5%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

Page 51: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF ADVERSE EVENTS TO 2015

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

51

18.9%

4.7%

18.5%

1.8%

1.3%

6.9%

0.0%

7.3%

1.3%

0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

3.9%

1.3% 1.7%

21.8%

8.7%

10.8%

1.5%

0.2%1.2% 1.4%

5.2%

1.0%2.1%

3.3%2.3%

8.3%

0.2%1.0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

2016 2015

Page 52: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

52

Se

cti

on

Sp

on

so

red

By

Are you a Vendor that is not listed in this Report? Fill out your Profile for

2017 NOW!

Using a system not listed in this Report? Tell your Vendor!

Page 53: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

DEVIATIONS AND NON-CONFORMANCES

53Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

19.4%

4.0%

23.4%

1.1%1.1%

8.6%4.0%

1.4%

8.6%1.1%

1.1%

2.5%

1.8% 5.8%

1.8%

2.2%12.2%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

AutoSHEQ

Cebos

ETQ

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

IQS, Inc.

MasterControl

Pilgrim

Q-Pulse (Gael)

SAP

SharePoint (Microsoft)

Trackwise (Sparta Systems)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 54: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER DEVIATIONS AND NON-

CONFORMANCES VENDORS*

Agile PLM (Oracle)

Arena Solutions

Blue Mountain

CAMA Software

ComplianceQuest

Enovia PLM (Dassault Systemes)

JIRA (Atlassian)

Lotus Notes

Montium

Oracle

QMSrs Ltd

Qumas (Dassault Systemes)

Redmine

Rescop

ServiceNow

TeamPage (Traction Software)

uniPoint Software

54Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 55: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH DEVIATIONS AND

NON-CONFORMANCES SYSTEM

55Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

16.2%

33.1%

14.3%

4.5% 10.2%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

4% 11%

24%

33%

28%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 56: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

DEVIATIONS/NON-CONFORMANCES SYSTEM

56Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

35.0%4.5%

7.9%

6.0%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

33.8%

1.5%0.4%0.8%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 57: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF DEVIATIONS AND NON-

CONFORMANCES TO 2015

57Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

17.9%

3.7%

21.6%

1.0%

8.0%

3.7%

1.3%

8.0%

1.0%2.3% 1.7%

5.3%

1.7% 2.0%

23.9%

8.7%

10.7%

1.4% 2.4%1.6%

0.4%

7.1%

1.6%3.4% 1.8%

10.1%

0.2% 0.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2016 2015

Page 58: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

58

Se

cti

on

Co

-Sp

on

so

red

By

Se

ctio

n C

o-S

po

nso

red

By

Page 59: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT

59Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

13.0% 2.0%

24.6%

1.3%2.7%

8.0%

1.0%

4.3%

1.3%

15.9%

1.0%

1.0% 5.0%

2.0%4.0% 13.0%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

Cebos

Documentum (EMC)

ETQ

FirstDoc (CSC)

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

IQS, Inc.

MasterControl

Qumas (Dassault Systemes)

SAP

SharePoint (Microsoft)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 60: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT

VENDORS*

123Compliance

Agile PLM (Oracle)

Arena Solutions

AutoSHEQ

ComplianceQuest

eDOCS (OpenText)

Empower PLM (Omnify Software)

Formpipe.GxP (Formpipe Software AB)

JIRA (Atlassian)

Liquent

Lotus Notes

Montium

NextDocs

Pilgrim Quality Solutions

Q-Pulse (Gael)

Rescop

TeamPage (Traction Software)

TRIM Records Management (HP)

uniPoint Software

Veeva

60Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 61: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH DOCUMENT

MANAGEMENT

61Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

TIME SATISFACTION

22.3%

35.2%

10.6%

5.7% 13.6%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

2%

7%

23%

34%

34%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 62: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

62Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

17.6%2.3%

4.6%

3.1%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

28.8%

46.2%

1.1% 1.9%1.1%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 63: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT

SYSTEM TO 2015

63Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

12.7%

2.0%

24.1%

0.3%

1.3% 2.6%

7.8%

4.2%

0.0% 0.0%1.3%

15.6%

0.7% 1.0% 1.0%

4.9%

2.0%

3.9%

18.4%

6.8%

16.6%

2.6%

0.6%

6.0%

1.4% 1.2% 1.4% 1.4%0.2%

12.4%

1.8% 1.2% 2.0%

7.4%

0.0%0.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%2016 2015

Page 64: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & SAFETY (EHS)

64Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

30.4%

5.4%

34.5%

8.1%

2.7%2.0%

16.9%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

ETQ

SAP

SharePoint

Other

Page 65: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH &

SAFETY (EHS) VENDORS*

Blue Mountain

DataPipe (Knorr Associates)

ecoLOGIC Systems

Entropy (BSI)

HAZMIN (Logical Technology)

KMI

MSDSonline

QPR Software PLC

SFS Chemical Safety

65Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 66: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL

HEALTH & SAFETY (EHS) SYSTEM

66Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

9.2%

18.4%

3.4%

3.1%

7.3%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

3%

9%

33%

27%

29%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 67: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

17.6%2.3%

4.6%

3.1%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & SAFETY (EHS) SYSTEM

67Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

24.5%

11.9%

0.4%

0.4%

0.4%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 68: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH &

SAFETY (EHS) TO 2015

68Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

20.0%

3.6%

22.7%

5.3%

0.4%1.8% 1.3%

19.8%

5.6%

9.9%

0.6% 0.8% 1.2%0.0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

2016 2015

Page 69: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LABORATORY MANAGEMENT (LIMS, ELN, ETC.)

69Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

24.7%

8.6%

4.3%

4.3%

11.8%6.5%

2.2%

3.2%

5.4%

4.3%

2.2%

22.6%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

Agilent

Empower (Waters Corp.)

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

LabWare (Waters)

Lims1 (Ltech Australia Pty Ltd)

SAP

SQL*LIMS

Star LIMS

Thermo Scientific

Other

Page 70: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER LABORATORY MANAGEMENT

VENDORS*

Apollo LIMS (Common Cents Systems)

Blaze LIMS (Blaze Systems)

Clinsys Group

CORE LIMS (Core Informatics)

Labtronic / LABWORKS (PerkinElmer)

Rescop

70Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

* Those software vendors with less than a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in this list of other Vendors.

Page 71: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH LABORATORY

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

71Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

3.8%

10.4%1.9%

2.7%

6.9%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

13%

27%

45%

12%

Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 72: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

LABORATORY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

72Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

17.6%2.3%

4.6%

3.1%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

24.5%

11.9%

0.4%

0.4%

0.4%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 73: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF LABORATORY MANAGEMENT

TO 2015

73Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

13.7%

4.8%

2.4%

0.6% 0.6%

2.4%

6.5%

0.6%

3.6%

1.2% 1.8%

3.0%2.4%

1.2%

13.6%

4.9%

1.4%0.4% 0.2% 0.2%

1.8%

0.6%

3.4%

1.0%

4.9%

3.8%

2.0% 1.4%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

2016 2015

Page 74: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

MANUFACTURING EXECUTION SYSTEM (MES)

74Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

18.7%

8.8%

2.2%

1.1%

4.4%

3.3%

2.2%

2.2%

3.3%

2.2%

9.9%

41.8%

Manual / Microsoft Office)

Custom/Internally Developed

Apriso (Dassault Systemes)

Camstar (Siemens)

Epicor

Infor

Oracle

QAD

Rockwell

SAGE

SAP

Other

Page 75: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER MANUFACTURING EXECUTION

SYSTEM VENDORS*

IBS US

JDA

MAPEX Software

Navision (Microsoft)

NetSuite

SharePoint (Microsoft)

Werum Software & Systems

Wonderware (Invensys / Schneider Electric)

75Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 76: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH MANUFACTURING

EXECUTION SYSTEM

76Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

2.3%

7.3%

2.7%2.7%

12.0%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

3%

13%

44%

37%

4%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 77: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

MANUFACTURING EXECUTION SYSTEM

77Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

16.6%

1.5%1.9%

0.0%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

11.6%

11.2%

1.2% 0.0% 0.8%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 78: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF MANUFACTURING EXECUTION

SYSTEM TO 2015

78Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

10.2%

4.8%

1.2%0.6%

2.4%1.8%

1.2% 1.2%1.8%

1.2%

5.4%

0.6%0.0%

9.3%

6.7%

0.2%

1.0%0.4%

1.0%

2.6%

0.6%1.0%

0.2%

8.3%

1.0% 1.0%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

2016 2015

Page 79: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

SECTION SPONSORED BY

79Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Page 80: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

PRODUCT LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT (PLM)

80Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

25.9%

9.9%

4.9%3.7%

1.2%1.2%

3.7%13.6%

1.2%

18.5%

8.6%

1.2% 1.2%

4.9%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

Agile PLM (Oracle)

Arena PLM

eMatrix/Matrix One (Dassault)

Enovia PLM (Dassault Systemes)

ETQ, Inc.

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

OnePlace (Eclipse Computing)

PSC Software

SAP

Siemens PLM

Windchill PLM (PTC)

Other

Page 81: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH PRODUCT

LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

81Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

4.3%

13.6%

1.2%

6.2%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

1%

8%

36%

29%

26%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 82: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

PRODUCT LIFECYCLE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

82Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

14.3%

1.6%

3.1%

1.6%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

12.8%11.2%

1.2%

0.0%

0.0%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 83: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF PRODUCT LIFECYCLE

MANAGEMENT TO 2015

83Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

12.6%

4.8%

2.4%1.8% 1.8%

6.6%

9.0%

4.2%

0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%0.0%

10.6%

5.9%

6.7%

0.4%0.0%

1.4%

0.0%

6.1%

0.6%

0.2% 0.2%

1.4% 1.4% 1.2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%2016 2015

Page 84: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL (SPC) /

PROCESS ANALYTICAL TECHNOLOGY (PAT)

84Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

24.8%

5.3%

0.9%

8.0%

2.7%0.9%

14.2%

26.5%

0.9% 12.4%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

Cebos

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

Infinity QS

ISP Software Solutions

Microsoft Excel*

Minitab

Northwest Analytics (NWA)

PQ Systems

SIMATIC (Siemens)

Synergy (Zontec)

WinSPC (DataNet Quality Systems)

Other

*Due to analytical capabilities in MS Excel, this has been extracted from Manual/MS Office into a specific response.

All

Page 85: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH SPC/PAT SYSTEM

85Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

2.7%

10.5%

7.0%

2.3%

8.2%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

11%

9%

32%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 86: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF SPC/PAT

86Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

21.9%

1.6%1.2% 0.4%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

7.8%

0.4%0.4%0.0%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 87: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF SPC/PAT TO 2015

87Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

13.6%

2.9%

4.4%

1.5%

7.8%

14.6%

0.5% 0.5%

6.7%

3.1%

0.0%

1.4%

3.5%

5.5%

0.8%0.6%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

2016 2015

Page 88: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

SUPPLIER QUALITY

88Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

26.4%

2.8%

25.9%7.5%

5.7%

1.4%

5.2%

4.2%

2.4% 4.2%

1.4%

2.8%

9.9%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

ETQ

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

IQS, Inc.

MasterControl

SAP

SharePoint (Microsoft)

Trackwise (Sparta Systems)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 89: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER SUPPLIER QUALITY VENDORS*

Ariba

AutoSHEQ (Centurion Quality Management)

ComplianceQuest

Documentum (EMC)

Infor

IQRC

Muddy Boots Software

Oracle

Pilgrim Quality Solutions

QAD

Q-Pulse (Gael)

89Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 90: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH SUPPLIER QUALITY

90Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

15.2%

27.3%

7.8%

3.5%10.5%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

4%

8%

33%

28%

27%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 91: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF SUPPLIER

QUALITY

91Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

28.5%2.7%

6.6%

5.1%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

30.5%25.4%

0.4% 0.8%0.0%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provide

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 92: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF SUPPLIER QUALITY TO 2015

92Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

25.5%

2.7%

25.0%

7.3%

5.5%

0.0%1.4%

5.0%

1.1% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1%

4.1%

2.3%

4.1%

1.4%2.7%

28.1%

8.6%

11.5%

1.4% 1.2% 1.0%0.2%

3.9%

0.0%

1.0%

0.4%

1.4%

4.9%

0.2%

3.1%

0.0% 1.0%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

2016 2015

Page 93: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TRAINING/LEARNING MANAGEMENT

93Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Note: Some participants may have selected multiple systems if represented within their organizations. Those software vendors with less than

a 1% response are not reflected in the chart but are included in “Other.” Those vendors with no selection are still reflected in the Appendix.

14.4%2.7%

25.9%

1.9%1.5%

6.1%4.2%

1.1%2.7%

13.3%

1.5%

1.5%

2.3%

1.5%4.6%

14.8%

Manual / Microsoft Office

Custom/Internally Developed

ACE (PSC Software)

ComplianceWire (UL Eduneering)

Cornerstone OnDemand

ETQ

GMPPro (MOTTO Systems)

IQS, Inc.

IsoTrain (Softek)

MasterControl

Saba

SharePoint (Microsoft)

SuccessFactors (SAP)

Verse

ZenQMS

Other

Page 94: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

LIST OF OTHER TRAINING/LEARNING

MANAGEMENT VENDORS*

123Compliance

AutoSHEQ

Cebos

ComplianceQuest

Halogen Software

NextDocs

PeopleSoft (Oracle)

Pilgrim

Plateau (SAP)

Qumas (Dassault Systemes)

Rescop

SumTotal

Taleo (Oracle)

Trackwise (Sparta Systems)

uniPoint Software

94Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

* Those software vendors with 0% response are not reflected in this table but are included in this list of Vendors in the Appendix.

Page 95: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

TIME & SATISFACTION WITH

TRAINING/LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

95Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

TIME SATISFACTION

19.3%

35.0%

11.8%

4.3% 8.3%

< 1 year 1-3 years 4-6 years 7-9 years > 10 years

6%10%

26%

32%

25%

Awful Poor Average Good Excellent

Page 96: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INSTALLATION & IMPLEMENTATION OF

TRAINING/LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

96Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

INSTALLATION IMPLEMENTATION

30.3%

7.5%

9.1%

7.5%

On-Premise

3rd Party Hosted

Cloud/SaaS Single Tenant

Cloud/SaaS Multiple Tenant

29.1%

38.6%

1.6%

1.2%0.8%

Totally Internal

Worked with Software Vendor

Used a local service provider

Used boutique service provider

Used top IT service provider

Page 97: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

INTEGRATION OF TRAINING/LMS WITH QUALITY

OR DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

97Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0%

Other

Manually extract data from our Quality or DocumentManagement System and enter it again into the

Training/LMS System

Quality or Document Management System iselectronically integrated with our Training/LMS

System

Training Compliance is part of the Quality orDocument Management System functionality

2.4%

11.8%

20.1%

28.3%

Page 98: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF TRAINING/LEARNING TO 2015

98Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

14.2%

2.6%

25.4%

1.9% 1.5%

6.0%

4.1%

1.1%

2.6%

13.1%

0.4% 0.7%0.0%

1.5% 1.5%2.2%

0.4%1.5%

4.5%

20.7%

10.4%

12.4%

3.5%

0.6%1.2%

0.2% 0.2%

1.7%

8.7%

1.0% 1.9% 1.5% 1.0%0.2%

2.1%

1.0%0.4% 0.8%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

2016 2015

Page 99: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

SAAS / CLOUD BASED SYSTEMS

99Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

What percent of your systems are currently cloud based (or SaaS) or planned to be

within the next year?

14.1%

6.4%

7.6%

6.8%

8.8%

5.2%Less than 10%

Between 11-25%

Between 26-50%

Between 51-75%

Between 76-99%

100% are Cloud based

Page 100: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

COMPARISON OF CLOUD (SAAS) SYSTEMS TO

2015

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

100

9.2%

14.1%

6.4%

7.6%6.8%

8.8%

5.2%

21.8%

14.0%

7.8%

5.1%

7.4% 7.6%8.5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

2016 2015

Page 101: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

SOME SELECTED THOUGHTS TO THE TREND OF

QMS SOFTWARE MOVING TO THE CLOUD“Easy access, security concerns, private cloud preferred”

“Some people are stuck against it. If you pick your partners correctly, it can be such a positive change” “Uptime statistics are interesting, but more important is how often they update the software, do they have an organized/compliant process to do so and do they have a help desk that answers questions in minutes or hours”

“Great option for small companies, but the costs really add up”

“Only concern is ability to access tables to help define custom queries”

“The speed on interaction with application”

“Managing change control risk is a challenge”

“Takes the burden of data backup systems away and makes life easier for IT”

“I prefer this movement provided that the vendor has a firm grasp on software compliance needs”

“From a quality perspective I do not mind where a service is hosted so long as it can be qualified”

“Cloud based system qualification is new and complex. GAMP or FDA do not have very specific guidelines for cloud based software as yet”

“Makes a lot of sense in terms of accessibility and hardware costs. Customer service is very important to the system running effectively”

“Cloud only means another companies servers. Security is still an issue, as is encryption”

“For our company, cloud is the only way to go. We have limited IT resources. We also want all users to be able to use the system at the same time. Evaluating potential additional usage of cloud computing but moving cautiously”

“Current management is opposed to it”

“It is an excellent concept that works!”

“Risks involved in security of intellectual property are a big concern”

“Security restriction and risk is high for our data types”

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

101

Page 102: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

BIGGEST CHALLENGE IN IMPLEMENTING QMS

102Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

2.0%

2.4%

2.4%

4.0%

5.6%

8.0%

9.2%

9.2%

9.6%

11.2%

12.0%

14.5%

14.9%

18.1%

18.9%

21.7%

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0%

Difficulty in rolling out to many locations world-wide

Did not define lean process before automating

Data Management (master, transactional, archived)

Governance and Change Control

Customize too much instead of utilizing out of the box functionality

Integration with company's internal systems

Difficult to configure

Lack of focus from the company (not a priority)

Lack of IT support or IT resource availability during implementation

Lack of business resource availability during implementation

Validation

Requirements harmonization across all Business Units

Cost of implementation

Finding the right Vendor

Cost of licenses / subscription

Cultural adoption (i.e., not user-friendly, manual to electronic, legacy to newsystem, individual vs. harmonized requirements)

What else?

• Acceptance

• Data migration

• Upgrades cause more issues

• Working with systems vendor

preferred supplier

• Security and encryption

• Lack of keeping up with latest versions

• Duration

• Training and support for remote users

• Company politics

Page 103: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

BIGGEST TECHNOLOGY TREND IMPACTING QMS

103Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

3D Printing

Internet of Things (IoT)

Intelligent Automation / Smart Machines

Other

Information of Everything

Big Data Analytics

Digital Transformation

Mobility

What else?

• Cloud

• Electronic batch records

• Serialization of pharma products

• Electronic archiving

• Security

Page 104: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

RESOURCE SKILLS NEEDED FOR QMS SYSTEMS FUTURE SUCCESS

104Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

With the change of baby-boomers leaving prominent Quality jobs and Millenials coming on-board eager to drive to a new standard, some skills need to be kept at a premium level. Although some of baby-boomers still need better computer skills, this won’t be a problem for Millenials growing up in the age of computers, tablets, smart phones and the internet. Some of the skills needed is not a surprise as these exist today: business process/products and regulatory requirements for Quality, Lean Six Sigma to keep operations efficient without additional cost. But most of all are resources that can be change agents and cultural adoption leaders to help the organization adopt and embrace the new technologies that are affecting Quality now and in the future.

Good trainers who know how to train will be needed to be coupled with business SMEs making sure that the investment in rolling out of new system is being understood and used properly. With new technology, companies will need resources who are critical thinkers and have the ability to correctly recognize, prioritize and control risk. Lastly, with all the technology changes, IT needs a closer relationship with quality / business by having the technical know-how but with business acumen.

• Business Process Engineering

• Training, Certified Trainers and Communication

• Data Management

• Computer Literacy

• Lean Six Sigma

• World-wide regulatory knowledge in manufacturing, supply and post-market surveillance

• System Admin skills beyond one person

• Change Agents, Cultural Adoption Leaders

• Risk Assessment and Impact

• Technical Know-How with Business Acumen

• Compliance Literacy

• Business Analysts with Critical Thinking to Recognize, Prioritize and Control Risk

• Validation

• Facilitation across IT and business and across various business units

• Dedicated team for implementations and updates

• Facilitate standardization across entire enterprise

Page 105: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

SELECTED PARTICIPANT’S COMMENTS IN GENERAL

“Much needed in our world of metrics”

“Have external auditors use ONE system”

“Managing the validation and qualification aspect of the implementation is key”

“The cultural change going from a paper-based to an electronic QMS is the toughest part of implementation”

“FDA is slow to adopt new technologies”

“Once working properly, they have saved us so much time now”

“Continuous usage gives us long term benefits to the company”

“Electronic version should be mandatory”

“Always lean before you automate, begin with the end in mind - define what do you want delivered from the system (reports, metrics, etc.)”

“Real time data is more and more the trend”

“Provide comprehensive training to everyone”

“Need a standardized approach to validation within industry”

105Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Page 106: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR 2017 SURVEY

• Risk Management (new)

• Electronic Batch / DHR Records (new)

• Add Customer Service related question(s) to each category

• Validation (new) and add related questions to each category

• Add Mobility related questions to each category

• Which regulations have the most impact to QMS software*

• Add Security and privacy of data related questions to each category

• IoT*

If you have other ideas for next year’s survey, please take our very quick

Survey on Ideas Now! Thanks.

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

106

* Will take this under consideration but difficult when going across multiple industries or complex ideas.

Page 107: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

107

Go

ld S

po

nso

rG

old

Sp

on

so

r

Page 108: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

108Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 109: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 109Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Arena Solutions989 E. Hillsdale Blvd, Suite 250

Foster City, CA 94404 USA

Arena invented cloud PLM. Its holistic suite of PLM, supply chain and QMS

solutions enables innovative OEMs with complex electronics to manage their

BOMs, facilitate engineering change orders and speed prototyping to improve

margins and collapse time to market. Arena has been ranked a Top 10 PLM

provider and won the coveted Design News Golden Mousetrap Award in 2016.

Contact: Umesh Malhotra

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: +1 877 937 1433

Website: www.arenasolutions.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 51-200

Years in Business, Since: 2000

Annual Revenue: Privately Held

Geographic Regions: All

Primary Industries: Automotive, Biotechnology, Computer Hardware, Software,

Networking, Consumer Electronics, Goods, Services, Electrical & Electronic

Manufacturing, Industrial Automation, Machinery, Medical Device, Oil, Gas,

Renewables & Energy, Pharmaceuticals, Plastics, Railroad Manufacturing,

Semiconductors, Telecommunications, Transportation/Trucking/Railroad

Solutions Offered: Adverse Events, Audit Management (Internal/External),

Calibration & Maintenance, Management, CAPA Management, Change

Control Management, Complaints (Product Quality, Technical), Document

Management, EHS (Environmental, Health & Safety) Management,

Exception Management (deviations, nonconformances), Laboratory

Management, PLM, SPC/PAT, Supplier Quality Management, Training

Management

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: Cloud/SaaS Multi-Tenant

Cognizant MedVantage6330 South 3000 East, Suite 200

Salt Lake City, Utah 84121

MedVantage from Cognizant, is a cloud-based solution for Medical Device

Enterprise- built on Force.com and Service Cloud Platform that helps Medical

device Industry for seamless Product Recall/Repair Management Process and

ensures regulatory compliance (GxP, CAPA, FDA 3500A Med Watch, 21 CFR

820, 821 and Part 803) and Post installation field services management.

Contact: GowriShankar Vembu

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: +1 408 306 7130

Website: www.cognizant.com/medvantageercontrol.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 5000+

Years in Business, Since: 1994

Annual Revenue: 1B+

Geographic Regions: Asia Pac, Europe, Middle East, North America

Primary Industries: Medical Device

Solutions Offered: Adverse Events, CAPA, Complaints, Deviations and

Nonconformances, Supplier Quality

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: Cloud Multi-tenant Subscription

Page 110: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

EtQ, Inc.399 Conklin Street, Suite 208

Farmingdale, NY 11735 USA

EtQ's flexible platform has been the foundation for automating critical compliance

solutions for over 20 years. Whether you are looking for an enterprise solution,

mid-market solution, or you're an individual contributor, EtQ truly has a solution

for every company in the world. The result is a set of solutions for all market types

residing on a common, proven and strong compliance platform technology. This

means that regardless of size, scope, or investment, EtQ has a product for you.

Our product family consists of EtQ Reliance for Enterprise, Verse Solutions for

SMB, and traqpath - our free compliance event and CAPA tracking app for mobile

and Web.

Contact: Timothy Lozier

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: +1 516 293 0949

Website: www.etq.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 201-500

Years in Business, Since: 1992

Annual Revenue: Privately Held

Geographic Regions: All

Primary Industries: All

Solutions Offered: Adverse Events, Audit, Calibration & Maintenance, CAPA,

Change Control, Complaints (Product Quality, Technical), Deviations and

Nonconformances, Document Management, EHS, PLM, Supplier Quality,

Training

Certifications: ISO 9001, ISO 27001

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: On-Premise, Cloud Single-tenant subscription, Cloud Multi-tenant

Subscription

110Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

CyberMetrics - Bronze1523 W. Whispering Wind Drive, Suite 100

Phoenix, AZ 85085

CyberMetrics Corporation delivers world-class, auditor-recommended software

solutions for calibration management and maintenance management that are

flexible, scalable and easy to implement, manage and use. Over 12,000

facilities worldwide choose our software solutions to assure standards

compliance, maximize efficiency and reduce costs.

Contact: Shana Jordan

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: 480-371-2333

Website: http://www.cybermetrics.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 1-50

Years in Business, Since: 1988

Annual Revenue: Privately Held

Geographic Regions: All

Primary Industries: Automotive, Biotechnology, Chemicals, Consumer

Electronics, Goods, Services, Cosmetics, Defense & Space/Military,

Electrical & Electronic Manufacturing, Food & Beverages, Gambling &

Casinos, Glass, Ceramics, Plastics& Concrete, Hospital & Health Care,

Industrial Automation, Machinery, Medical Device, Mining & Metals, Oil,

Gas, Renewables & Energy, Packaging & Containers, Paper & Forest

Products, Pharmaceuticals, Transportation

Solutions Offered: Calibration & Maintenance, Document Management,

Supplier Quality Management, Training

Certifications: ISO 9001, ISO 13485, ISO/TS 16949, ISO/IEC 17025, AS 9100

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: On-Premise, Cloud Single-tenant subscription, Cloud Multi-tenant

Subscription, 3rd Party Hosted License

Page 111: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 111Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Formpipe Life Science13 Poplars Court

Lenton Lane

Nottingham N G7 2RR UK

The Formpipe Life Science division simplifies complex process and technology

environments to deliver customers’ quality and compliance goals within the relevant

regulatory framework(s). This is achieved through a combination of Consultancy to ‘Get

Compliant’, and Products and Consultancy to ‘Stay Compliant.’ Both are delivered by

experts from the sector. A suite of products addresses the compliance and quality needs of

Life Science organisations, all of which are designed to be easy to use, increase efficiency

and reduce costs across businesses with 50-25,000 users. All Life Science products are

managed using a bespoke internal Quality Management System and are supported and

maintained by a dedicated global team. The company's software helps improve efficiency,

cut costs and reduce risk exposure.

Contact: Keith Williams

Email: [email protected]

Phone: +44 115 924 8475

Website: www.formpipe.com/lifescience

Facts:

Number of employees: 201-500

Years in Business, Since: 1997

Annual Revenue: 1-25M

Geographic Regions: North America, Europe, Asia Pac

Primary Industries: Hospital & Health Care, Information Technology & Services,

Medical Device, Pharmaceuticals, Cosmetics, Chemicals, Biotechnology

Solutions Offered: Training, Supplier Quality Management, Manufacturing

Execution (MES), Laboratory Management (LIMS, LES), Deviations and

nonconformances, Document Management, Change Control, CAPA, Audit

Are you FDA 21 CFR Part 11/ EU DIR Compliant? Yes

License Type: On-Premise (in-house), Cloud (single tenant) Subscription, Cloud

(multi-tenant) Subscription

MasterControl6330 South 3000 East, Suite 200

Salt Lake City, Utah 84121

MasterControl Inc. is a committed team of quality, regulatory and software

experts who work to empower regulated companies to get their products to

market faster. MasterControl's quality management software solutions reduce

overall costs, increase efficiency and accelerate compliance, creating a

significant competitive advantage for customers. MasterControl's complete

quality management solution is designed for easy implementation, validation

and use, continually improving on the promise of Compliance Accelerated.

Contact: Matt Lowe

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: 801-942-4000

Website: www.mastercontrol.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 201-500

Years in Business, Since: 1993

Annual Revenue: Privately Held

Geographic Regions: All

Primary Industries: Automotive, Biotechnology, Chemicals, Consumer

Electronics, Goods, Services, Electrical & Electronic Manufacturing, Food

& Beverages, Hospital & Health Care, Logistics, Warehouse & Supply

Chain, Medical Device, Oil/Gas/Renewables & Energy, Pharmaceuticals

Solutions Offered: Adverse Events, Audit, Calibration & Maintenance, CAPA,

Change Control, Complaints, Document Management, EHS, Deviations

and Nonconformances, Supplier Quality, Training

Certifications: ISO 9001

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: On-Premise, Cloud Multi-tenant Subscription

Page 112: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by

Motto Systems PVT LTD - BronzeSAMRIDHI VASYAM, JAI HIND COLONY, MADHAPUR

HYDERABAD, TELENGANA 500081 INDIA

Motto Systems’ is an organization that has made pioneering strides in providing

top-class enterprise quality management solutions (EQMS) to Life Sciences’

companies. GMPPro is a end to end quality compliance tool. Driven by innovation

and backed by a qualified team of GMP domain and IT experts. We offer complete

Warehouse, Production, QA, QC & Maintenance modules.

Contact: K RAJGOPA

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: +9553444478

Website: www.MottoSys.Com

Facts:

Number of employees: 1-50

Years in Business, Since: 2012

Annual Revenue: 1-25M

Geographic Regions: Asia Pac, Europe, Latin America, Middle East, North

America

Primary Industries: Chemicals, Food & Beverages, Packaging & Containers,

Pharmaceuticals

Solutions Offered: Audit, Calibration & Maintenance, CAPA, Change Control,

Complaints, Document Management, Deviations and Nonconformances,

Laboratory Management (LIMS, LES), Product Lifecycle (PLM), Supplier

Quality Management

Certifications: ISO 9001, ISO 27001

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: On-Premise, Cloud Single-tenant subscription

112Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Qualio156 2nd St.

San Francisco, CA 94105 USA

Qualio helps life-saving technologies get to market faster through making Quality

a competitive advantage. A simple dashboard makes it easy to manage all the

daily activities for quality teams. Real-time reporting puts you in control so you can

be audit ready at all times, and built-in QA/RA best practices makes it easy to

build, maintain and scale your quality program. With customers all over the word

from early stage medical devices to public biotechnology organizations, Qualio is a

perfect partner to help your company scale. And with offices in California, Ireland

and Poland – no matter where you are we’ve got you covered.

Contact USA: Colin Moore

Contact Ireland: Damien Barry

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: +1 855 203 2010 USA

Phone: +353 1 697 1522 Ireland

Website: www.qualio.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 1-50

Years in Business, Since: 2012

Annual Revenue: Privately Held

Geographic Regions: Asia Pac, Europe, North America

Primary Industries: Biotechnology, Medical Device, Pharmaceuticals

Solutions Offered: CAPA, Change Control, Complaints (Product Quality, Technical),

Deviations and Nonconformances, Document Management, Training

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: Cloud Multi-tenant Subscription

Page 113: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 113Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

SoftExpert Software201 South Biscayne Blvd. Suite, 1200

Miami/FL USA

SoftExpert is a market leader in software and services for enterprise-wide

business process improvement and compliance management, providing the

most comprehensive application suite to empower organizations to increase

business performance at all levels and to maximize industry-mandated

compliance and corporate governance programs. Along with its extensive

network of international resellers, SoftExpert also provides hosting,

implementation, post-sales support and validation services to ensure that

customers realize the maximum value from their investments.

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: 1-646-504-7910

Website: www.softexpert.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 201-500

Years in Business, Since: 1995

Annual Revenue: Privately Held

Geographic Regions: All

Primary Industries: All

Solutions Offered: Audit, Calibration & Maintenance, CAPA, Change Control,

Complaints (Product Quality, Technical), Deviations and

Nonconformances, Document Management, EHS, Laboratory

Management, PLM, SPC/PAT, Supplier Quality, Training

Certifications: ISO 9001, ISO 13485, ISO 14000, ISO 27001

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: On-Premise, Cloud Single-tenant subscription, Cloud Multi-tenant

Subscription, 3rd Party Hosted License

Traction Software245 Waterman St., Suite 504

Providence, RI 02906

Traction TeamPage is collaboration software geared towards addressing a

spectrum of ISO related use cases ranging from documentation and management

team meetings/reporting to tracking quality issues and executing on improvement

projects.

Contact: Jordan Frank

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: 1-401-487-2268

Website: www.tractionsoftware.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 1-50

Years in Business, Since: 1996

Annual Revenue: Privately Held

Geographic Regions: Africa, Asia Pac, Europe, North America

Primary Industries: Automotive, Banking, Biotechnology, Chemicals, Computer

Hardware/Software/Networking, Construction, Consumer Electronics/

Goods/Services, Defense & Space/Military, Electrical & Electronic

Manufacturing, Environmental/Facilities Services, Financial Services, Food

& Beverages, Hospital & Health Care, Industrial Automation, Information

Technology & Services, Logistics/Warehouse & Supply Chain, Medical

Device, Mining & Metals, Oil/Gas/Renewables & Energy, Pharmaceuticals,

Semiconductors, Wholesale

Solutions Offered: Adverse Events, Calibration & Maintenance, CAPA, Change

Control, Complaints, Document Management, Deviations and

Nonconformances, Training

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: On-Premise, Cloud Single-tenant subscription

Page 114: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 114Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Want to be a sponsor for the

2017 QMS Vendor Software

Benchmark Report?

ZenQMS128 Front Street

Conshohocken, PA 18925 USA

ZenQMS develops amazing quality management software for the whole

enterprise. Our cloud-based platform, which includes modules for Document

Management, Issue/CAPA, Training, Audits & Supplier Management, offers

companies a tremendous opportunity to improve quality compliance and save

money.

Contact: Jeff Thomas

E-Mail: [email protected]

Phone: +1 888 280 1433

Website: www.ZenQMS.com

Facts:

Number of employees: 1-50

Years in Business, Since: 2010

Annual Revenue: Privately Held

Geographic Regions: Africa, Asia Pac, Europe, Latin America, Middle East,

North America

Primary Industries: Biotechnology, Chemicals, Cosmetics, Food & Beverage,

Hospital & Healthcare, Medical Device, Pharmaceuticals

Solutions Offered: CAPA, Change Control, Complaints (Product Quality, Technical),

Document Management, Training

Are you U.S. FDA 21 CFR Part 11 / EU DIR: YES

License Type: Cloud Multi-tenant Subscription

Page 115: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

115Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 116: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 116

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

123Compliance • • • • • • •4Sight (GE) •

A2Z Manager (Reetec) •ABB LIMS •Accelerys (Dassault Systemes) •Access Automation •ACE (PSC Software) • • • • • • • • • • • •

ActiveQ (Open Mind Solutions) • • • • •Affytrac (Affygility Solutions) •

Adaptive BMS • •Aegis Solutions • •Agilent •

Agile PLM (Oracle) • • • • • •Aleph Tav Technologies • • • • •

Ambrit •AMPLEXOR • • • • • • • • • •

Ape Software •Apollo LIMS (Common Cents Systems) •Apriso (Dassault Systemes) •

Aras Corp • • • •Arena Solutions • • • • • •

Argus (Oracle) • •Ariba •

Aris Global • • •ASI DataMyte •ASKEHS Engineering •

AspenTech •AssessNet •

AssetSmart •Assure (SHE Software) •AssurX • • • • • • • • •Audit Utopia •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 117: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 117

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

Audit Weaver • • •Autodesk PLM • •AutoSHEQ • • • • • • • • • •AX for Pharma •BioTrax QMS • • •Blaze LIMS (Blaze Systems) •BLISS LIMS (Baytek International) •BPLM Solutions GMBH •Breeze Software •Bright Interactive •Blue Mountain • • •Caliber Series (Dhruthi Technologies) •Caliso •Calspex (Vantek Software) •CalTrak (Transcat) •CAMA Software LLC • • • • • • • •CAMO Software AS •Camstar (Siemens) • •CAP Software • • •CAQ AG • • • • •Cebos • • • • • • •CERDAC (Simco Electronics) •ChartHouse Data Management •CIMx Software •Cincom •Cintellate (SAI Global) •CIQA • • • • • • • • •CIS Software • • • •Civerex Systems Inc. •Claromentis •Clinsys Group •Clix / Learning Suite (IMC) •CloudSDS •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 118: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 118

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

CloudQMS (Cambio Services LLC) • • • • • • • •CMO Software •CMX (Beamex) •Cognizant MedVantage • • • • •COMPASS (Process Data Control) •Complaints Pro (Coretec Solutions) •Compli •Compliance 360 (SAI Global) • • • •Compliance Control • • • • • • • •ComplianceQuest • • • • • • • •ComplianceWire (UL Eduneering) •CompuCal Calibration Solutions •CORE LIMS (Core Informatics) •Cornerstone OnDemand •CPRO 2000 Plus (BDR Systems) •Critical Manufacturing •CSC LIMS •Csols Ltd •Cyanic Automation •CyberMetrics • • • •DataLyzer • •DataPipe (Knorr Associates) •Dimensional Control Systems •Dexma •DocSpace (Harcourt Consulting Inc) •Documentum (EMC) • • • • • •DocuShare (Xerox) •Dokeos •DoneSafe •DRM (Donor Dialog) •e3 Solutions •Ease Inc. • • • • • • • • • • •EasyCal (Time Electronics) •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 119: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 119

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

Ecocion •EcoIntense •ecoLOGIC Systems • •eCompliance Management Solutions • • •eDOCS (OpenText) • •EHASoft •EHS Data Limited •EHS Insight (StarTex Software) •eMatrix/Matrix One PLM (Dassault Systems) • • • • •Emerson Process Management MES •EMEX •Empower (Waters Corp.) •Empower PLM (Omnify Software) • • • • • • •EMSolution (Solution Foundry) •Enablon •Ennov Software • • • •Enovia PLM (Dassault Systemes) • • • • •Ensur (Docxellent) • • • • • •Entropy (BSI) • • • • • • • • •Enviance •Epicor • • •EPIQ Technologies, Inc. •Epiware (Epiware Document Management Software) • •ePowerCenter (Astute Solutions) •ERA Environmental Management Solutions •Ethics Point (NAVEX Global) •ETQ • • • • • • • • • • • •eTracker •eTraininfo (CIMCON Software) •Eusoft Srl •Everest (Lynk Software) •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 120: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 120

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

Eyelit, Inc •Factory (Aptean) •Fast Track (Aust) Pty LTD. • • • • • • • • •Field iD (Master Lock) • •FileNet (IBM) •FirstDoc (CSC) •FlexMMS (CGA Software) •FlinkISO open source (Techmentis) • • • • • •Formpipe.GxP (Formpipe Software AB) • • • • • • • • •Fourth Shift (Infor) •Fusion Systems •GageControl (Quality Software Concepts) •Gage Insite (Indysoft Corporation) •GageList (Expresso Moon) •GageManager (Altegra) •GAGEpack (PQ Systems) •GAGEtrak/SUPPLIERtrak (CyberMetrics Corporation) • •GMPPro (MOTTO Systems) • • • • • • • • • • • •Grand Avenue Software • • • • • • • • •Greenlight.Guru • • • • • • • • •GSQA (EMNS Inc.) • •Halogen Software •Hamsagars •Harrington Group International • • • • • •HAZMIN (Logical Technology) •HealthStream •HighJump Software •Honeywell Process Solutions •HP Quality Center • • • • •i-Sight (Customer Expressions) •iBASEt • • • • •IDBS ELN •Ideagen PLC • • • • •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 121: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 121

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

IBS US • • • • • • • • •iCOLOGIQ (formerly Quality Online) • • • • • • • • •IFS •IHS • • •iLearning (Seertech) •ImageWave •IN-CAL •IndustrySafe (TRA, Inc.) •Infinity QS •Infor • • • • • • •Infor EAMS •Infotehna • • • • • • • •Intelex • • • • • • • • •Interax Group • • • • • • • •Integrum Management Systems • • • • • •Intrastage • • • • •IQMS • • • • • • • • • •IQRC, Inc • • • • • • • •IQS, Inc. • • • • • • • • • •ISOLUCION S.A. • • • • • • • • • • •Isoma (E Squared UK) •isoTracker (Lenox Hill Ltd.) • • •IsoTrain (Softek) •isoXpress (AQA Company) •ISP Software Solutions • • • •IssueTrak •ISTM (Remedy) •iTac Software •JDA • •JD Edwards • • •JIRA (Atlassian) • • • • • •JobBOSS (Exact Business Software) • •Kalypso •Kintana (HP/Mercury Interactive) • •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 122: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 122

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

KMI •Knowledge Tree •Labsoft (Computing Solutions) •Labtronic / LABWORKS (PerkinElmer) •LabVantage • •LabWare (Waters) • •Learn.com (Oracle) •LearningPlus •Lighthouse Systems Limited •Lims1 (Ltech Australia Pty Ltd) •Liquent •Lotus Notes • •M3 (Rover Data Systems, LLC) • •Mainsaver •MAPEX Software • •MasterControl • • • • • • • • • • •Matrix Gemeni LIMS (Zumatrix/Autoscribe) •Maximo (IBM) •Medgate •MetricStream • • • • • • •mHelpDesk • •Micro Control Solutions • • • • • • • • • •Microsoft Dynamics •Microsoft Excel • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •Microsoft Navision • • • •Millennium III - M3 (Rover Data Systems, LLC) •Minitab •MIRS (A V Systems) •MPDV USA •Montrium • • • • • • •MSDSonline •Muddy Boots Software • •Neomatics • • • • •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 123: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 123

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

Neosystems •Net-Inspect •NetRegulus (PTC) • • •NetSuite •New Generation Computing, Inc. (NGC) • • •NextDocs • • • • • •Northwest Analytics (NWA) •Novatek International • • • • • • • • • •Noverant •NuGenesis Lab Management System (Waters Corp.) •Omnex • • • •OnePlace (Eclipse Computing Australia Pty Ltd) •Onyx (Aptean) •Open Mind Solutions • • • • • •Optiva PLM (Infor) • • •Oracle • • • • •Oracle Harvest •Pastel Auditor (Sage) •PDXpert PLM (Active Sensing) • • •PeopleSoft (Oracle) •Performix, Inc •Pharmschul (GMP Software) • •Pilgrim Quality Solutions • • • • • • • • •Pinnacle Business Solutions • •PIVOTAL (Aptean) •PlantNet (Altegra) •Plateau (SAP) •Plex Systems • •PMED (Oazez Software E Tecnologia) •PQ Systems • •Proactive Health and Safety Solutions •ProCAL (Prime Technologies) •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 124: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 124

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

ProcessPro •Prodac Systems •Product Vision (CA Technologies) •ProMation Systems Inc. (PSI) •ProntoForms •Prospecta Software •PSC Software • • • • • • • • • • • •Q5 Systems • • • •QAD • • • • • •QAI (Quality Institute of America) • • • • • • •QA Systems (QASYS) • • • • • •QMSrs Ltd • • • • • •QPR Software PLC • • •Q-Pulse (Gael) • • • • • • • •QT9 (World Quality Systems) • •QTi •QUAD (Aster Technologies) • • • •Qualio • • • • • •Qualisyst Ltd. •Qualitron Systems •Quality Link Software • • • • •Quality Systems Toolbox • • • • • • •Quality-Works (KvalitetsGruppen) • •Qualtrax • • • • • • •Quarta (Blulink) • • • •Qube Software •Qumas (Dassault Systemes) • • • • • • • •Rational (IBM) •Redmine • •Regula •Remedy ARS (BMC) • •Remedy Interactive • • •Rescop • • • • • • • •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 125: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory

Network

125

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

ReSol Technologies • • • • • • • •Rivo Safeguard • • • • •Rockwell • •Ross ERP (Aptean) •Saba •Saeker Systems •Safefood 360 • • • • • • • • • • • •Safety Concepts Group •Safety Tracker Software • •SafetyReports.com •SafetySync • •Sage PLM • • •Salesforce • •Samanage •SAP • • • • • • • • • • • • •Seacoast Laboratory Data Systems Inc. •Seertech •Selerant • •Sercle QMS • • • • • •ServiceNOW • • • •SFS Chemical Safety •SharePoint (Microsoft) • • • • • • • • • •Siebel (Oracle) • •Siemens PLM • • • •SIMATIC (Siemens) • • •SimpleTrak (ION Quality Systems) • • • • • • • •Simply Safety (CCD Systems) •Sinerji (SoftTech A.S.) •Sirwill FBM (Global Quality Village) • •SISTRADE Solutions • • •SLIM (InterCAX) • •Smaat (Maerix) •SOAR Solutions •

Page 126: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 126

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

SoftExpert Software • • • • • • • • • • • •SofTech Inc. • •SoftTech Health LLC • • •Solabs • • • • • • •Sopheon • •Spiramid •SQL*LIMS •Star LIMS •SuccessFactors (SAP) •SumTotal •Sword Achiever • • • • • • •Symbion Systems, Inc. •Synergy (Zontec) •Syspro •Taleo (Oracle) •TeamMate Audit Management •TeamPage (Traction Software) • • •Tech-X (Cetex) • • •TEDS Inc. •The Lean Machine •The WERCS (UL) •Thermo Scientific (Darwin, Galileo, Nautilus, SampleManager, Watson) •Tip Technologies • • • • • • • • •Title21 Health Solutions • • • • • • • • •TMS (Collaborative Quality Systems) •TQS-9000 (ISP Software Solutions) • • •Trace One • •TrackPro •Trackwise (Sparta Systems) • • • • • • • •Training Tracker (Computer Directions) •TrakSYS (Parsec Automation) •TRIM Records Management (HP) •UniLab (Siemens) •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 127: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

*Source Data 2016: LinkedIn Quality & Regulatory Network Group, other LinkedIn Groups, email campaigns.

Sponsored by 127

Audit Calibration CAPAChange Control Complaints

Adverse Events

Document Mgmt EHS

Deviations / NCs LIMS MES PLM

SPC / PAT

Supplier Quality Training

uniPoint Software • • • • • • • • • • • •uPerform (ANCILE) •

Ultimo • •

Veeva • • • • • • • • •

Velocity Software •

Verse Solutions • • • • • • • •

Vintara • • • • • • •

Visual Enterprise Solutions • •

Vivaldi Software • • • • • • •

V-Soft Computers •

Wavefront Software •

webOSCAR (Verdi Technology Assoc.) •

Werum Software & Systems •

Windchill Quality Suite (PTC) • • • • • •

Windchill PLM (PTC) • • • • • • •

WinSPC (DataNet Quality Systems) •

Wonderware (Invensys / Schneider Electric) • •

xTrak (usCalibration) •

ZenDoc (GetZenDoc) • • •

ZeraWare •

ZenQMS (formerly The QAB) • • • • • • • • •

Zumatrix (Autoscribe Informatics) •

Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Page 128: 2016 Quality Management System Vendor Software Benchmark Report

128Quality & Regulatory Network LLCCopyright 2016 Quality & Regulatory Network LLC. All Rights Reserved.