Enterprise System Spectator blog: ERP and enterprise system vendor evaluation, selection, and implementation.

The Enterprise System Spectator

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Key success factor for SaaS suites: functional parity

As we all know, software-as-a-service (SaaS) has been one of the bright spots in the enterprise systems marketplace these days. The advantages are becoming more widely recognized: lower total cost, faster time-to-benefit, little to no capital expenditure, and less pain in system upgrades.

In fact, in some segments of the enterprise market, SaaS is already where most of the action is. For example, in CRM system selection it is difficult not to consider one of the leading SaaS solutions, such as Salesforce.com, Oracle's CRM On-Demand, RightNow.com and others. For HR management systems (HRMS), likewise, we see SaaS providers such as Workday, Taleo, and Success Factors gaining significant market share for net-new deals.

Reaching for full maturity
So, why haven't SaaS solutions completely taken over the enterprise software market, especially for full-suite ERP? Because there is one area where SaaS providers still lag behind: functional parity. For full-suite ERP, there are still precious few SaaS providers. And those that do attempt "full suite replacement" still have major gaps in their functional footprint.

However, the landscape is changing quickly. For example, until recently, we have been reluctant to short-list SaaS providers as full-suite options for manufacturing firms. Those that had ambitions to be full-suite providers simply lacked basic functionality needed for manufacturing, especially vertical-specific requirements. But we are now finding that SaaS providers at least deserve a look. These include the following:
  • Plex Systems was the first SaaS provider out of the gate with a full-suite ERP offering for manufacturing firms. More on Plex in a minute.
  • NetSuite is a full-suite provider. But until recently, it has only been a viable option for service businesses, because it lacked many fundamental features for manufacturers, such as standard costing, shop scheduling, capacity planning, and MRP. However, since I last visited this issue, a NetSuite partner, Rootstock, has been building extended manufacturing functionality on top of NetSuite's platform. I've spoken at length to the developers at Rootstock, whom I know from their previous work at Relevant (since acquired by Consona). They are making very fast progress, thanks to the ability to rapidly develop on NetSuite's platform. Rootstock's extensions to NetSuite are claimed to operate seamlessly with NetSuite's core financials and CRM.
  • SAP is moving in the same direction with its Business ByDesign (ByD) offering. Although SAP has been slow to move the product into general release, you can't fault the objective, which is to become a full-suite offering. I especially like the use-case for large SAP installed-base customers, which have a hard time justifying use of SAP ERP in smaller divisions. Such organizations frequently adopt a "two-tier ERP" strategy, where SAP runs at the corporate office and in larger business units, while a smaller footprint ERP, such as Epicor, QAD, or Microsoft Dynamics AX, runs in the smaller divisions. The use of ByD in this scenario, should be an attractive alternative.

    Update: Since this post was first published, I have learned that in FP 2.0 (released Sep. 2009), ByD now has what appears to be very complete functionality for manufacturing operations, including integrated quality control, as well as supply chain planning.
  • Workday is a SaaS provider, currently serving the HRMS and financials functions, but they have ambitions to be a full ERP replacement, at least for services-based organizations. With Dave Duffield as one of the founders they appear to be following the path that Dave took at PeopleSoft: start with HR, add financials and purchasing, then fill out to become a full-suite offering. Personally, I think Workday is underestimating how long it will take them to get there, but I have little doubt they will reach the goal. And they are going after the large company segment, which is unusual for most SaaS providers.
  • Update: Infor's Syteline is now being newly launched by Infor in a SaaS deployment model. Based on a lengthy briefing I received from Infor, it appears that Syteline qualifies as a full-suite SaaS offering. The new deployment option uses a single instance of Syteline's application server, with separate databases for each customer. While some might argue that it doesn't fully meet the pure definition of multi-tenancy, it more than makes up for it in functional parity with on-premise ERP suites, which is the point of this post. I'm hoping to write more on this new offering soon, as it appears to be another good option for those looking to go with SaaS for full-suite ERP.
  • Update: Epicor Express is another full-suite SaaS offering. Running as a pure multi-tenant deployment of Epicor 9, the offering today is supporting about 15 live customers, with another 15 in implementation. Epicor is currently targeting this offering at small job shops, with customer friendly subscription terms and very low fixed-fee implementation services ($7,500, including a defined set of data migrations). But I can see this product being up-sold to larger customers with more complex requirements as well.
The number of SaaS providers with full-suite offerings still pales in comparison to traditional on-premise ERP. Note, however, that I don't consider hosted versions of on-premise software in the SaaS category, such as hosted versions of Lawson's ERP products, or Oracle's E-Business Suite. Single-tenant hosted products simply do not offer the full benefits of SaaS outlined earlier.

Full-suite SaaS gaining traction
Although the number of true multi-tenant full-suite SaaS offerings today is limited, they are rapidly becoming a viable alternative to on-premise products or single-tenant hosted offerings.

The latest example is a big win for Plex Systems, at Invensys Controls, one of three business units of UK-based Invensys plc. This business unit provides components, systems, and services used in appliance, heating, air conditioning, refrigeration, and residential thermostat products. It has locations in 15 countries which include 22 manufacturing sites, two distribution centers, and seven engineering centers--and Plex Online will be implemented in all of them.

It sounded like a pretty big deal for a SaaS provider, so I followed up with Plex to find out more. Here are the details:
  • Plex will be replacing 11 different traditional on-premise ERP systems in the various locations at Invensys Controls, which has revenue of approximately $900 million.
  • The win by Plex comes not only against traditional on-premise ERP vendors--SAP, Infor, and Oracle, but also against NetSuite. So, Invensys actually was willing to consider two full-suite SaaS options: Plex and NetSuite.
  • The decision in favor of Plex came down to two factors: (1) functionality--a single, comprehensive solution that covered all of their functional areas, and (2) the SaaS deployment model with associated benefits of cost-savings, speed of implementation, and scalability.
Interestingly, according to my correspondence with Plex, Infor was de-selected as it did not have a true SaaS offering, and both SAP and Oracle were eliminated for non-response to the RFP. One can only speculate that Invensys may have become focused on going with a true SaaS offering, and neither SAP nor Oracle couldn't come up with one. If so, we may be coming to the point where even organizations as large as Invensys Controls see true multi-tenant SaaS as their preferred deployment option.

If that's the case, why didn't NetSuite win the deal? According to Plex, NetSuite had gaps in meeting key functional requirements. It would appear then that the deal came down to Plex versus NetSuite--two true SaaS offerings. If so, this underlines my point that the only thing holding back full-suite SaaS offerings from taking further market share is functional parity.

Back in the 1990s and early part of this decade, ERP selection often came down to long checklists of functionality, becoming more and more detailed as full-suite offerings matured. Eventually, such long checklists became less useful, especially for large deals, as the Tier I providers (SAP and Oracle) could pretty much check every box. (As a result, in our own ERP selection consulting at Strativa, we prefer these days to focus more on key differentiators and industry-specific requirements.)

Furthermore, in software selection deals we've worked lately, we are seeing much more interest on behalf of buyers in true SaaS deployment than we saw even one or two years ago. As buyers hear about the success of other companies with solutions such as Salesforce.com, the benefits of SaaS are much more well-understood, and the traditional objections (security, reliability, "where is my data," etc.) become less of an issue.

So, as the focus shifts to SaaS for full-suite ERP, we may be seeing functional requirements again becoming the key selection criteria. If the deployment option of true multi-tenant SaaS is superior to traditional on-premise deployment or single-tenant hosted offerings, then the only thing standing in the way of SaaS is functional parity. But, as development platforms such as NetSuite's make addition of new functionality much easier, the functional gaps are being closed much more rapidly than many realize.

Traditional on-premise vendors beware: the full-suite SaaS providers are catching up quickly.

Update, Oct. 15. Updated the post with newly-learned information about SAP's Business ByDesign and rearranged the sequence of solutions. Updated also to clarify Workday's intent to support services-based businesses with a full-suite offering.

Update, Oct. 21. Added information about Infor's Syteline offering in a SaaS deployment model.

Update, Nov. 17. Added information about Epicor Express, which is deployed as full multi-tenant SaaS offering.

Related posts
Ensuring win-win in SaaS aggregation of customer data
Plex Online: pure SaaS for manufacturing
Workday pushing high-end SaaS for the enterprise
Lawson's cloud services: good start, but no SaaS
NetSuite a viable alternative for SAP customers?
A game-changing play in enterprise software
The inexorable dominance of cloud computing
Computer Economics: The Business Case for Software as a Service

by Frank Scavo, 10/13/2010 04:12:00 PM | permalink | e-mail this!

 Reader Comments:


Do you think once SAAS vendors achieve parity, they will take over the ERP market? Or will there always be a significant portion (1/3? 1/2? 2/3?) of the market that won't or can't have their ERP "in the cloud"?
Hi Si, always good to hear from you.

I think for the foreseeable future there will be a "significant portion" (as you say) of organizations that retain their on-premise systems. I say this for no other reason than it takes a LONG time for many organizations to replace their legacy systems. As you know.

But for so-called "net new" deals (new sales of ERP), I think there is no question that the percentage will continue to shift to SaaS providers. In my opinion, the major thing holding this back is the lack of functional parity of those ERP SaaS providers today, compared to more mature on-premise offerings.
Hi Frank, please consider changing feature pack 2 to SAP Business ByDesign FP (Feature Pack) 2.6 - that is the actual version being launched in July. Cheers, Frank
Frank, thanks for the correction. I've fixed the reference accordingly.
Good post. I wonder, besides parity, if the way Multi-tenancy implementation is done in NetSuite and Plex also contributed to the deal. Plex from my knowledge does separate-database-same-code per customer, not that there is anything wrong with it.
Subraya, when I interviewed Plex president Mark Symonds back in April, he told me that there is a single database for all customers on the same instance. (They run a few separate instances for load balancing purposes.).

See my post here:
Frank - great post. As a SaaS evangelist since early on, I've battled barriers to adoption, steep onramps and general lethargy frequently.

I generally agree with your contention however I do think there is more to this than just the functional parity discussion. As an example, professional services automation (PSA) has been pretty much at feature parity (as an example, NetSuite ERP/CRM plus OpenAir) for quite some time now, yet still adoption is good... but not stellar.

I'd class the functional gap as step one in the due diligence process - it's the traditional feature comparison and until recently the traditional vendors have been able to rely on this to "win the deals". However functional parity is now the norm in a number of verticals and the traditional vendors are resorting to other means to slow adoption - concerns round jurisdiction, security, vendor viability etc etc
Ben, I consider you an expert in this subject, so I appreciate your insights.

Some buyers still get hung up on the traditional objections to SaaS, such as security, vendor viability, etc. But as I noted in the post, I am noticing that these objections are fewer these days than even a couple years ago.

The PSA market in particular has had SaaS-based point solutions for many years, though not full-suite offerings until recently (e.g. NetSuite/Open Air, as you point out). If you count single tenant hosted solutions, the PSA market goes back even further. My own firm, Strativa, has used a hosted PSA solution since 2001. I can't imagine a green field professional services firm today going with anything but a SaaS solution. The ease of use for the mobile workforce is simply too good.

So, if you are still seeing the traditional objections, that is a surprise. Perhaps this is more the case with older professional services firms that have already invested in on-premise financials, for example, and don't want to make a 100% conversion to a full suite?

Still, the lack of feature parity for most verticals, in my opinion, is the biggest barrier. At least, from what I've seen, it's what keeps SaaS providers off the finalist list, even if they make the original long (let's take a quick look) list.
I have heard a number of objectives over the years regarding SaaS, but two seem to be still valid. One, with SaaS, you are forced to upgrade when the vendor does the upgrade regardless of whether you want to. Why wouldn't you want to? Your users are trained on the current version and you may not want to do additional training now.

Second, when a SaaS upgrade is done, it is done in a production environment. You don't get a chance to test it in a test or development environment to ensure that your customizations or integrations work properly.

Interested in your opinions on these.
Stephen, I think the answer both points depends on the SaaS provider. Many of them do allow quite a bit of configurability on new features. For example, Plex claims that customers can selectively turn new features on or off. This is important for all customers (as you indicate) but especially for customers in regulated environments (such as medical devices) where the system must be validated for intended use.

On the second point, of course upgrades occur in the production environment. I believe some providers, however, do allow customers to have access to new versions in a sandbox or testing environment. I don't have a good example of this, however. Maybe someone else can chime in.
An email came in from Dani Shomron pointing to various articles that deal with scalability in SaaS operations. I think that this should interest most of you:

Post a Comment

Powered by Blogger

(c) 2002-2018, Frank Scavo.

Independent analysis of issues and trends in enterprise applications software and the strengths, weaknesses, advantages, and disadvantages of the vendors that provide them.

About the Enterprise System Spectator.

Frank Scavo Send tips, rumors, gossip, and feedback to Frank Scavo, at .

I'm interested in hearing about best practices, lessons learned, horror stories, and case studies of success or failure.

Selecting a new enterprise system can be a difficult decision. My consulting firm, Strativa, offers assistance that is independent and unbiased. For information on how we can help your organization make and carry out these decisions, write to me.

My IT research firm, Computer Economics provides metrics for IT management, such as IT spending and staffing benchmarks, technology adoption and investment trends, IT management best practices, IT salaries, outsourcing statistics, and more.

Go to latest postings

Search the Spectator!
Join over 1,700 subscribers on the Spectator email list!
Max. 1-2 times/month.
Easy one-click to unsubscribe anytime.

Follow me on Twitter
My RSS feed RSS News Feed

Computer Economics
IT Spending Ratios by Industry and Company Size
IT Spending as a Percentage of Revenue by Industry, Company Size, and Region
Outsourcing Statistics
IT Spending and Staffing Benchmarks
IT Staffing Ratios
IT Management Best Practices
Worldwide Technology Trends
IT Salary Report


2014 Best Independent ERP Blog - Winner 2013 Best ERP Writer - Winner Constant Contact 2010 All Star Technobabble Top 100 Analyst Blogs

Key References
Strativa: Business strategy consulting, strategic planning
Strativa: IT strategy consulting
Strativa: Business process improvement, process mapping, consultants
Strativa: IT due diligence
Strativa: ERP software selection consulting and vendor evaluation
Strativa: CRM software selection consulting and vendor evaluation
Strativa: Project management consulting, change management
StreetWolf: Digital creative studio specializing in web, mobile and social applications
Enterprise IT News: diginomica

Spectator Archives
May 2002
June 2002
July 2002
August 2002
September 2002
October 2002
November 2002
December 2002
January 2003
February 2003
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009
October 2009
November 2009
December 2009
January 2010
February 2010
March 2010
April 2010
June 2010
July 2010
August 2010
September 2010
October 2010
November 2010
December 2010
January 2011
February 2011
March 2011
April 2011
May 2011
July 2011
August 2011
September 2011
October 2011
November 2011
December 2011
January 2012
February 2012
March 2012
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
July 2012
September 2012
October 2012
December 2012
January 2013
February 2013
March 2013
May 2013
June 2013
July 2013
September 2013
October 2013
December 2013
January 2014
February 2014
March 2014
April 2014
May 2014
June 2014
July 2014
August 2014
September 2014
October 2014
November 2014
December 2014
February 2015
March 2015
April 2015
May 2015
June 2015
July 2015
September 2015
October 2015
November 2015
February 2016
May 2016
June 2016
July 2016
August 2016
September 2016
October 2016
January 2017
February 2017
May 2017
June 2017
October 2017
January 2018
April 2018
May 2018
January 2019
February 2019
Latest postings