2011 Wisdom Crowds

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM
IB51811
2011 Edition Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM
Study Findings and Analysis Report
May 18, 2011
Dresner Advisory Services, LLC
Licensed to Information Builders
http://www.business-intelligence-study.com
IB51811
Disclaimer:
This report should be used for informational purposes only. Vendor and product selections should be made based on multiple information sources, face-to-face meetings, customer reference checking, product demonstrations and proof of concept applications. The information contained in the Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study Report is a summary of the opinions expressed in the online responses of individuals who chose to respond to our online questionnaire, and does not represent a scientific sampling of any kind. Dresner Advisory Services, LLC shall not be liable for the content of the Report, the study results, or for any damages incurred or alleged to be incurred by any of the companies included in the Report as a result of its content. Reproduction and distribution of this publication in any form without prior written permission is forbidden.
http://www.business-intelligence-study.com 2
Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

A New Era of Business Intelligence Unfolds
IB51811
Only a short while ago many had proclaimed the demise of the Business Intelligence marketplace predicting only a few large suppliers and a dearth of innovation. Instead, weve witnessed a renaissance that has defied conventional wisdom! Spending for Business Intelligence solutions and services continues to grow driven by a more mainstream understanding of its importance and value. But, unlike the market of a few years ago, Business Intelligence has developed a broader base driven by many small and mid-sized organizations from around the world. This segment will continue to grow at a far faster rate than others for the foreseeable future. And, true to its roots, Business Intelligence has re-emerged as business-centric, with users driving BI purchase and deployment efforts - sometimes in cooperation with IT and other times independently. This has unleashed the demand for solutions that are easier to buy, faster to deploy and easier to use. Its also driven the demand for better process integration, mobile computing support, in-memory, and collaborative (social) capabilities to name a few. These changes, while welcome, will also be disruptive both for suppliers and consumers. As a result, organizations will need to take a more active role in planning, managing and evolving their BI portfolios. In spite of some challenges, we welcome this new era of Business Intelligence, with the promise of both innovation and more choices than in the past. Best,
Howard Dresner Chief Research Officer Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

Contents
IB51811
A New Era of Business Intelligence Unfolds.................................................................................................. 3 Background: .................................................................................................................................................. 7 About Dresner Advisory Services: ................................................................................................................. 7 Method: ........................................................................................................................................................ 8 Survey Design and Criteria: ....................................................................................................................... 8 Awareness, Recruitment & Data Gathering:............................................................................................. 9 Vendor/Market Categories: ........................................................................................................................ 10 Executive Summary:.................................................................................................................................... 12 Study Demographics: .................................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 1 - Organization Size ................................................................................................................ 14 Figure 2 - Functions Represented ....................................................................................................... 15 Figure 3 - Industries Represented ....................................................................................................... 16 Figure 4 Geographies Represented ................................................................................................ 17 Analysis & Trends ........................................................................................................................................ 19 Departmental/Functional Alignment with BI Tools: ............................................................................... 19 Figure 5- Business Intelligence Adoption by Function / Time............................................................. 19 Figure 6 -BI Adoption by Function / Time North America ................................................................ 20 Figure 7 - BI Adoption by Function / Time EMEA ............................................................................. 21 Figure 8 - BI Adoption by Function / Time Rest-of-World ................................................................ 22 Scale of Business Intelligence Deployments: .......................................................................................... 23 Figure 9 Numbers of Users/Organization: 2010 versus 2011 .......................................................... 23 Numbers of Business Intelligence Tools in Use: ..................................................................................... 24 Figure 10 - Number of BI Tools/Organization: 2011 vs. 2010 ............................................................. 24 Figure 11 Numbers of Business Intelligence Products by Organization Size ................................... 25 Figure 12 Numbers of Business Intelligence Products by Vendor Category ..................................... 26 Experience with Business Intelligence: ................................................................................................... 27 Figure 13 Business Intelligence Deployments/Organization: 2011 versus 2010 ............................. 27 Figure 14 Business Intelligence Deployments by Industry............................................................... 28 Figure 15 Business Intelligence Deployments by Organization Size ................................................ 29 Figure 16 Business Intelligence Deployments by Vendor Category................................................. 30
http://www.business-intelligence-study.com 4 Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC
IB51811
Key Related Technologies / Initiatives .................................................................................................... 31 Figure 17 Related Technologies & Initiative Strategic to Business Intelligence .............................. 31 Figure 18 Importance of In-Memory Analysis by Vendor Category................................................. 32 Figure 19 Importance of Mobile by Industry ................................................................................... 33 Figure 20 Importance of Big Data by Size of Organization .............................................................. 34 Figure 21 Importance of Big Data by Region ................................................................................... 35 Figure 22 Importance of Cloud/SaaS by Function............................................................................ 36 Figure 23 Importance of Cloud/SaaS by Size of Organization ......................................................... 37 Figure 24 Importance of Cloud/SaaS by Industry ............................................................................ 38 Figure 25 Importance of Open Source by Organization Size ........................................................... 39 Figure 26 Importance of Open Source by Industry .......................................................................... 40 Figure 27 Business Intelligence Spend by License/Service Type...................................................... 41 Figure 28 Departments with Any Business Intelligence Spending ................................................... 42 Figure 29 Percentage of 2011 BI Spend by Department (among departments with spend) .......... 43 Market Segment Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 45 Figure 30 - Market Segment Alignment - Business vs. IT .................................................................... 45 Figure 31 - BI Market Segment Alignment by Industry ....................................................................... 46 Figure 32 - Market Segment Alignment by Organization Size ............................................................ 47 Figure 33 - Market Segment Alignment by Implementation Age ....................................................... 48 Industry and Vendor Analysis: .................................................................................................................... 50 Scoring Criteria ........................................................................................................................................ 50 Overall Industry Performance ................................................................................................................. 51 Figure 34 Industry Performance Sales/Acquisition Experience .................................................... 51 Figure 35 - Industry Performance - Value: 2010 vs. 2011 ................................................................... 52 Figure 36 - Industry Performance: Quality and Usefulness of Products ............................................. 53 Figure 37 - Industry Performance: Technical Support ........................................................................ 54 Figure 38 - Industry Performance: BI Vendor Consulting ................................................................... 55 Figure 39 - Industry Performance: Recommended............................................................................. 56 Vendor Stacked Rankings:........................................................................................................................... 57 Business Intelligence Titans .................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 40 - Business Intelligence Titans - Stacked Rankings ............................................................... 58
IB51811
Established Pure-play Business Intelligence Vendors ............................................................................. 58 Figure 41 - Business Intelligence Established Pure-plays - Stacked Rankings..................................... 58 Emerging Business Intelligence Vendors ................................................................................................ 59 Figure 42 Business Intelligence Emerging Vendors Stacked Rankings .......................................... 59 Open Source Business Intelligence Vendors ........................................................................................... 59 Figure 43 Open Source Business Intelligence Vendors Stacked Rankings .................................... 60 Detailed Vendor Scores:.......................................................................................................................... 60 Figure 44 - Sample Vendor Detailed Scoring Chart ............................................................................. 61 Figure 45 Actuate/BIRT Detailed Score ............................................................................................ 62 Figure 46 Dimensional Insight Detailed Score ................................................................................. 63 Figure 47 - IBM/Cognos Detailed Ranking .......................................................................................... 64 Figure 48 - Information Builders Detailed Score ................................................................................. 65 Figure 49 - Jaspersoft Detailed Score.................................................................................................. 66 Figure 50 - Microsoft Detailed Score .................................................................................................. 67 Figure 51 - MicroStrategy Detailed Score ........................................................................................... 68 Figure 52 - Oracle Detailed Score........................................................................................................ 69 Figure 53 - Pentaho Detailed Score .................................................................................................... 70 Figure 54 PivotLink Detailed Score................................................................................................... 71 Figure 55 - QlikTech Detailed Score .................................................................................................... 72 Figure 56 - SAP/Business Objects Detailed Score ............................................................................... 73 Figure 57 - SAS Institute Detailed Score.............................................................................................. 74 Figure 58 - Tableau Detailed Score ..................................................................................................... 75 Figure 59 - Tibco/Spotfire Detailed Score ........................................................................................... 76 Figure 60 - Yellowfin Detailed Score ................................................................................................... 77 Appendix - The Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Survey Instrument............................... 78

Background:
IB51811
In April 2010, Dresner Advisory Services published its inaugural, landmark Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study with the intent of offering a fresh and objective view of the market by giving a voice to those actually using Business Intelligence (BI) solutions. In it we explored the perceptions, intentions and realities surrounding the Business Intelligence market from a number of perspectives and helped to shed light on current and emerging market dynamics. At that time we conceived our trademark 32-criteria vendor evaluation model and ranked 15 Business Intelligence vendors. In addition to broad market acceptance, we received acknowledgement and acclaim from the press, including InformationWeek, TechTarget, Smart Data Collective, ebizQ, TDWI, Intelligent Enterprise, ITBusinessEdge, and Information Management. The overwhelming success of this initial project formed the basis for the annual publication of this study.
About Dresner Advisory Services:

The Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study was conceived, designed and executed by Dresner Advisory Services, LLC - an independent advisory firm - and Howard Dresner, its President, Founder and Chief Research Officer. Howard Dresner is one of the foremost thought leaders in Business Intelligence and Performance Management, having coined the term Business Intelligence in 1989. He has published two books on the subject, The Performance Management Revolution Business Results through Insight and Action (John Wiley & Sons Nov. 2007) and Profiles in Performance Business Intelligence Journeys and the Roadmap for Change (John Wiley & Sons Nov. 2009). He lectures at forums around the globe and is often cited by the business and trade press. Prior to Dresner Advisory Services, Howard served as Chief Strategy Officer at Hyperion Solutions and was a Research Fellow at Gartner, where he led its Business Intelligence research practice for 13 years. Howard has conducted and directed numerous in-depth primary research studies over the course of the past sixteen years and is an expert in analyzing these markets.
IB51811
Our most recent market studies include the DAS Mobile Business Intelligence Market Studies and the widely acclaimed, annual Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study .
Method:
Using a straightforward and easy to complete online survey instrument (see appendix) we focused upon a host of market-related questions and our trademark 32 criteria vendor and product scoring. The study was opened for input to any valid users with first-hand BI vendor and product experience. Although specific vendor selections were listed, any vendor or product could be entered. As this is our second year of conducting this study, we were able to provide a number of year-over-year comparisons from 2010 to 2011.
Survey Design and Criteria:

Survey criteria were designed to elicit first-hand and real-world user experiences with Business Intelligence and associated vendors and products: Survey criteria included the following market topics: Budget allocations by department/function Spend by license and service type Key related technologies Vendor characterization Use of latest software version Open Source: community versus commercial
Vendor/product scoring criteria included: Sales/acquisition experience 8 criteria Value for price paid (Excellent Poor) Quality and usefulness of product 12 criteria Quality of technical support 5 criteria Quality and value of consulting services -5 criteria Whether vendor is recommended (Yes/No)

In addition, the following demographics were captured: Title, Function, Industry, Size of company, Geography Numbers of BI products being used, Vendor, Product Length of time product has been in use, Numbers of users of product
IB51811
See Detailed Vendor Rankings and the Appendix for more detail on study criteria.
Awareness, Recruitment & Data Gathering:

To publicize the study and garner support, we aggressively leveraged social media sites (e.g., Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook), the press and existing email. Strong support was received from all corners, including key press: BusinessIntelligenceEdge, Information Management, ITBusinessEdge, TechTarget, and numerous blogs and re-tweets. Vendors were also allowed to direct customers to the study. To ensure that input was from actual users, we rejected any responses that could not be validated. Additionally, surveys completed by vendors or their agents were deleted. Approximately 10% of the sample was discarded. After final data quality processing, the total number of respondents in the sample was 630, an increase of 40% over 2010.

Vendor/Market Categories:
IB51811
For the purposes of this report, we have created four different BI industry subcategories in which to group vendors and analyze market behavior and direction. As in 2010, these include the Titans, Established Pure-play, and Emerging vendors. This year we have added Open Source BI vendors as a fourth category. Titans are the largest vendors, with extensive product and service offerings including Business Intelligence. In all cases these vendors have acquired Business Intelligence vendors (e.g., Oracle and Hyperion, IBM and Cognos, SAP and BusinessObjects). Vendors in this category include: IBM/Cognos, Microsoft, Oracle and SAP/BusinessObjects. Established Pure-Play BI vendors are predominately focused upon Business Intelligence software and services and have typically been in business for 15 or more years - with well established customer bases and revenue streams. Several are publicly held concerns. These include Information Builders, MicroStrategy, QlikTech and The SAS Institute. Emerging BI vendors are typically younger than other categories and offer unique and often innovative business models, technologies and/or services. This category includes: Dimensional Insight, PivotLink, Spotfire (Tibco), Tableau and Yellowfin. The vendors Arcplan, Birst, and Good Data also belong in this category, but could not be ranked due to small numbers of completed surveys. Open Source BI vendors have all adopted an open source approach to Business Intelligence, offering both a community (free) and commercial editions of their product(s). These include Actuate, Jaspersoft and Pentaho. Jedox (Palo) is also an open source BI vendor, but was not included in the rankings due to the small number of completed surveys.
IB51811
Executive Summary

Executive Summary:
IB51811
Functional alignment within organizations for Business Intelligence continues to shift. Most notably, in North America, business users appear to be increasingly driving BI adoption. We believe that the trend towards business-dominated BI is a global trend, with other geographies lagging behind North America by several years. The natural size of the BI workgroup appears to be settling at between 6 50 users larger than in 2010. The shift away from extremely large BI deployments, noted in 2010, continues in 2011. The numbers of (overlapping) BI tools continues to grow especially in the largest organizations and those using tools from Titans. Users employing Commercial Open Source BI were less likely to have multiple BI tools. The numbers of new Business Intelligence deployments appears to have slowed in 2011 compared with 2010, with growth coming from expansion of existing deployments. Decreases were pronounced in Financial Services, for nearly all size organizations, and for Established Pure-play vendors. Highest new deployment rates were found in Government and Technology verticals, and Open Source and Emerging vendor segments. Among the most important related technologies/initiatives was Integration with operational processes, Data mining and advanced algorithms and In-memory analysis. Other technologies showed demand in specific segments including Mobile, Big Data, Open Source, and Software-as-a-Service. A total of 63% of respondents reported budget increases in at least one BI area and 31% of respondents had increases of more than 10% in at least one area. Growth in spending for 2011 will favor traditional Business Intelligence software licenses, followed by services from BI vendors and third parties. Finance was the function that had budget allocated most frequently for BI, but IT and Sales had the largest allocation within most organizations. Of the four Business Intelligence sub-segments, all but Emerging products are adopted predominately by the IT function. Titans and Established Pure-plays have the broadest distribution across all organization sizes, while Open Source and Emerging vendors were more dominant in smaller ones. And, Open Source and Emerging vendors appear to have the youngest customer bases with the largest percentage of adoption within the past 2+ years.
IB51811
Study Demographics

Study Demographics:
IB51811
As with last year, our goal was to obtain a balanced base of survey respondents in order to create a truly representative sample and thereby more accurately reflecting market sentiment. This years sample has a similar distribution to last year with the smallest organizations comprising 27% of the sample and the largest with 21%. However, there was some modest shifting within the middle with organizations between 5,001 and 10,000 growing from 5% to 8%, and those between 1,001 2,000 decreasing from 8% in 2010 to 6% in 2011.
50%
Number of Employees
40%
29% 30% 27% 27% 27%
21% 21% 20%
10%
10% 10% 8% 6% 5%
9%
0% 1 - 100 Employees 101 - 1,000 Employees 1,001 - 2,000 Employees 2010 2,001 - 5,000 Employees 2011 5,001 - 10,000 Employees More than 10,000 Employees
Figure 1 - Organization Size
IB51811
We were quite pleased to see far greater business user/management participation in 2011 versus 2010. This year the IT Department comprised 50% of the overall sample versus 61% in 2010 (Figure 2).
100%
Function
80%
61% 60% 50%
40%
20% 12% 10% 7% 8% 1% 0% Information Technology (IT) Sales and Marketing Finance 2010 Operations 2011 Research and Development (R&D) 8% 11% 6%
17%
6%
Other
Figure 2 - Functions Represented

As with last year we have similar distribution across multiple industries, with strong representation from key industries including: Retail & Wholesale, Healthcare, and Financial Services.
IB51811
40%
Industry
30% 30% 27%
20% 15% 14%
13% 12% 10%
12%12%
12% 11%
12% 10%
6% 6% 4%
5%
0%
Consulting Financial Services Health Care Retail & Wholesale Technology Manufacturing Government Other
2010
2011
Figure 3 - Industries Represented
IB51811
Strong responses from around the world (Figure 4) have given a broad and more global perspective to the study. In contrast to 2010, we had stronger participation in 2011 from North America and EMEA and somewhat less from other geographies. We also had a large enough sample this year to break out Australia and New Zealand from APAC.
100%
Geography
80%
60%
57% 61%
40% 26% 22% 20% 7% 2% 0% North America Latin America 2010 EMEA 2011 Asia-Pacific Australia-NZ 14% 7% 5%
Figure 4 Geographies Represented
IB51811
Analysis & Trends

Analysis & Trends
Departmental/Functional Alignment with BI Tools:
IB51811
Last year we observed a shift from IT alignment (and deployment) of Business Intelligence, in favor of business management and users. In this years study, we see this trend continuing, with the decline of IT deployments starting ~ 5 years ago and with organizations globally reporting that more than half of deployments are now more closely aligned with business users and not IT (Figure 5)
BI Adoption by Function - All Regions

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 14% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% More than 10 years 6 - 10 years 3 - 5 years 1 - 2 years Less than 1 year 48% 63% 51% 49% 49% 9% 6% 14% 8% 11% 12% 9% 25% 24%
29%
31%
36%
9% 7%
Information Technology
Finance
Sales and Marketing
Other
Figure 5- Business Intelligence Adoption by Function / Time
As with last year, this apparent trend may be due to reductions in IT Departmental staffing and budgets during the economic recession. Finance, and its alignment with Business Intelligence, has remained relatively steady throughout, while Sales &
IB51811
Marketing appears to have declined. In contrast, other functions (e.g., Exec. Mgmt., HR, Manufacturing, Operations, R&D, Supply Chain) have grown. This trend is most pronounced if we look exclusively at North America (Figure 6). Here we can see that business users have consistently taken charge of Business Intelligence for the past 5+ years.
BI Adoption by Function - North America

100% 90% 27% 80% 70% 6% 60% 12% 50% 40% 69% 30% 20% 10% 0% More than 10 years 6 - 10 years 3 - 5 years Finance 1 - 2 years Sales and Marketing Less than 1 year Other 55% 53% 47% 2% 10% 10% 9% 15% 7% 7% 4% 19% 28% 32% 44%
44%
Figure 6 -BI Adoption by Function / Time North America
This may account for the myriad of tools that have emerged in recent years, which cater to users in many cases sidestepping the IT Department. In particular, we see very strong growth in adoption by Other business functions.
IB51811
In contrast, both EMEA (Figure 7) and Rest-of-World - e.g., APAC, LATAM (Figure 8) appear to favor IT-based BI deployments more than in North America.
BI Adoption by Function - EMEA

100% 10% 90% 29% 80% 70% 40% 60% 50% 40% 20% 30% 48% 20% 30% 10% 0% More than 10 years 6 - 10 years 3 - 5 years Finance 1 - 2 years Sales and Marketing Less than 1 year Other 47% 51% 50% 19% 16% 6% 11% 5% 8% 29% 31% 25%
14%
11%
Figure 7 - BI Adoption by Function / Time EMEA
While this trend appears to have leveled off in EMEA, IT-driven deployments of Business Intelligence appear to be on the rise in other parts of the world.
IB51811
Our interpretation of this data is that all geographies are moving towards businessdominated BI. However, EMEA and ROW are lagging behind North America by several years.
BI Adoption by Function - Rest of World

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 50% 20% 10% 0% 0 More than 10 years 6 - 10 years 3 - 5 years Finance 1 - 2 years Sales and Marketing Other Less than 1 year 50% 52% 58%
Figure 8 - BI Adoption by Function / Time Rest-of-World
Key Takeaways: Functional alignment within organizations for Business Intelligence continues to shift. Most notably, in North America, business users appear to be increasingly driving BI adoption. We believe that the trend towards businessdominated BI is a global trend, with other geographies lagging behind North America by several years.

Scale of Business Intelligence Deployments:
In last years report we noted a paradigm shift in the industry away from large implementations and in favor of smaller or moderately sized ones.
IB51811
In comparing deployment data from 2010 with that from 2011 we see a continuation of this trend, with extremely large deployments in apparent decline (Figure 9). However, we also observe that a new center of gravity for deployment size may be emerging with sizes of between 6 50 increasing and the smallest (1-5) decreasing. This trend offers a glimpse of what future BI group sizes will look like.
Numbers of BI Users/Organization: 2010 vs. 2011

30%
20%
20.0% 17.3% 16.1% 12.9% 11.0% 9.1% 12.9% 11.1% 9.8% 9.5% 8.3% 7.8% 9.1% 8.6% 6.4% 5.6%
12.4% 12.0%
10%
0% 1-5 6 - 10 11 - 20 21 - 50 51 - 100 101 - 200 201 - 500 501 1,000 More than 1,000
2010
2011
Figure 9 Numbers of Users/Organization: 2010 versus 2011

Numbers of Business Intelligence Tools in Use:
IB51811
For quite some time weve observed the growing proliferation of multiple Business Intelligence tools, predominately within the largest of organizations (Figure 10). With the growing presence of products which cater to business users and departmental functions, it would appear that the numbers of tools within many organizations will continue to expand. And, as we noted last year, these statistics understate the issue, as many users are unaware of all the tools being used within their organizations.
Number of BI Tools/Organization: 2010 vs. 2011

60%
50% 39%
47%
40%
36%
30%
26%
27% 24%
20%
10%
0% One -10% Two or Three Four or More
2010
2011
Figure 10 - Number of BI Tools/Organization: 2011 vs. 2010
IB51811
Like in 2010, the largest organizations tend to have the great variety of Business Intelligence tools (Figure 11). This has occurred over time as departmental/functional groups have invested in BI tools without the benefit (or knowledge) of corporate standards or even what other functions might be using. In fact, we found that in some instances multiple respondents from the same companies thought that their tool was the only one. As budgets shift away from IT and towards end user departments, these numbers will continue to rise. Of course, with common semantics, metadata and data warehousing, this might not be as much of an issue. From my experience, however, this is not the approach that most are taking. As a result, enterprises can expect the age-old problem of multiple and conflicting answers to business questions.
Numbers of BI Products by Size of Organization

100%
9% 9% 11% 8% 3% 5% 9%
18%
80%
30% 36% 28%
25%
60%
45% 45% 43% 46% 44% 46%
40%
20%
23%
35%
30% 22% 15% 17%
0%
Overall 1 - 100 101 - 1,000 1,001 - 2,000 2,001 - 5,000 5,001 - 10,000
One
Two or Three
Four or more
Don't Know
Figure 11 Numbers of Business Intelligence Products by Organization Size

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC 25
IB51811
When looking at numbers of tools by vendor category (Figure 12), we were interested to learn that Commercial Open Source BI users were less likely to have multiple tools. In contrast, BI users, with software from Titan vendors, were much more likely to have multiple tools. Of course Titan vendors typically serve the largest of organizations which also have the greatest numbers of tools. And, (not surprisingly) Emerging BI users were more likely to be unaware of how many tools were in use in the organization.
Numbers of BI Products by Vendor Category

100%
9% 26% 8% 18% 19% 27% 35% 12% 8% 8%
80%
25%
60%
42% 43% 44% 44% 37%
40%
61%
20%
32% 23% 13% 25% 21% 19%
0%
Overall Open Source Community Open Source Commercial Emerging Pureplay Titan
One
Two or Three
Four or more
Don't Know
Figure 12 Numbers of Business Intelligence Products by Vendor Category
Key Takeaways: The natural size of the BI workgroup appears to be settling at between 6 50 users larger than in 2010. The shift away from extremely large BI deployments, noted in 2010, continues in 2011. The numbers of (overlapping) BI tools continues to grow especially in the largest organizations and those using tools from Titans. Users employing Commercial Open Source BI were less likely to have multiple BI tools.

Experience with Business Intelligence:
IB51811
In order to better understand the growth of the industry, we take a closer look at the age of Business Intelligence deployments (Figure 13). In 2010, we saw an unusually large number of new BI deployments most especially in small and mid-sized organizations. Since that time, these implementations have shifted to the 1-2 years category, with stability in the 3 - 10+ year categories. Most notable is an apparent decline in new implementations for 2011 over 2010, with much of the market growth coming from the expansion of existing implementations.
BI Deployments/Organization - 2010 vs. 2011

50%
40%
32% 31% 30% 25% 25% 19% 16%
20%
18% 16%
10%
9% 9%
0%
Less than 1 year
1-2 years
3-5 years
6-10 years
2010
2011
More than 10 years
Figure 13 Business Intelligence Deployments/Organization: 2011 versus 2010


For 2011, almost all industries seem to be implementing fewer new Business Intelligence solutions than in 2010 (Figure 14). The substantial growth last year especially within SMEs has created the larger base which is now expanding the numbers of BI users for 2011. The largest declines in new implementations are within the Financial Services and Technology industry segments. The exceptions to this are Manufacturing and Government the two (apparent) growth segments for 2011.
IB51811
BI Deployments by Industry
100%
9% 15% 16% 14% 11% 7% 18% 21% 7% 8% 18% 6% 7% 4% 17% 4%
80%
18%
24% 25% 24% 46% 33%
60%
31%
25% 34%
29%
40%
25% 28% 23% 26%
36%
40%
24% 18% 23%
20%
12% 19% 19% 14% 18% 9%
Health Care Retail & Wholesale Technology Manufacturing Government Other
27% 20%
25%
23%
0%
Overall Consulting Financial Services
Less than 1 year
1 - 2 years
3 - 5 years
6 - 10 years
More than 10 years
Figure 14 Business Intelligence Deployments by Industry
IB51811
As we can see from Figure 15, there was substantial growth in 2010 implementations for small and mid-sized organizations. Although lower in 2011, these organizations continue to implement BI at an above-average rate. The exception is organizations between 5,001 and 10,000 employees where growth of deployments appears to have doubled over 2010 especially in Healthcare and Government.
BI Deployments by Organization Size

100%
9% 10% 10% 27% 28% 31% 29% 34% 30% 6% 12% 11% 7% 12% 12%
80%
16%
21%
13% 26%
60%
31%
34% 15%
40%
31% 25%
26%
16%
20%
22% 24% 16%
30% 18% 31%
19%
8%
10%
5,001 - 10,000 More than 10,000
0%
Overall 1 - 100 101 - 1,000 1,001 - 2,000 2,001 - 5,000
Less than 1 year
1 - 2 years
3 - 5 years
6 - 10 years
More than 10 years
Figure 15 Business Intelligence Deployments by Organization Size

When looking at deployments by vendor category (Figure 16), Open Source and Emerging vendors saw above average new deployments for 2011, with Titan and Established Pure-play categories experiencing below average numbers of new deployments.
IB51811
BI Deployments by Vendor Category

100%
9% 3% 5% 10% 19% 7%
80%
16% 28%
17% 19%
23%
60%
31%
29% 36% 38% 30%
40%
24% 23% 19% 26% 19% 19%
20%
21%
12%
15%
0%
Overall Open Source Emerging Pureplay Titan
Less than 1 year
1 - 2 years
3 - 5 years
6 - 10 years
More than 10 years
Figure 16 Business Intelligence Deployments by Vendor Category
Key Takeaways: The numbers of new Business Intelligence deployments appears to have slowed in 2011 compared with 2010, with growth coming from expansion of existing deployments. Decreases were pronounced in Financial Services, for nearly all size organizations and for Established Pure-play vendors. Highest new deployment rates were found in Government and Technology verticals, and Open Source and Emerging vendor segments.

Key Related Technologies / Initiatives
IB51811
This year we opted to expand our study to include substantially more market data and analysis. In this section we explore technologies and initiatives which are deemed strategic to respondents Business Intelligence efforts. In all, we asked about nine areas, as noted in Figure 17. Topping the list of importance (by mean average), is Integration with operational processes, Data mining and advanced algorithms and In-memory analysis. Those technologies & initiatives deemed less important were Open Source, Software-as-aService and Big Data.
Importance of Related Technologies

Integration with operational processes Data mining and advanced algorithms In-memory analysis Collaborative support for group-based analysis Mobile device support Ability to write to transactional applications Big data Software-as-a-service and "cloud computing" Open source software 0% Unimportant 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Very Important Critical
Somewhat Important
Figure 17 Related Technologies & Initiative Strategic to Business Intelligence
IB51811
Where significant, we created crosstab analyses, using key demographics to better understand the importance of related technologies. In Figure 18, we examine the importance of In-memory analysis (number 3 out of 9) by the various vendor market categories. We found that users of Commercial Open Source and Established Pure-play BI products were more likely to view this feature as critical or important. In contrast, there was less interest in in-memory analysis within the Titan and Community Open Source BI customer bases. Anecdotally, the Finance function favored in-memory analysis over other functions.
Importance of In-Memory Analysis by Vendor Category

100%
13% 12% 19% 38% 28% 34% 33% 36% 38% 9% 18%
80%
60%
34%
40%
38% 34% 39% 33%
42%
20%
28% 15% 21% 14% 13%
Emerging
10%
Pureplay Titan
0%
Overall Open Source Community Open Source Commercial
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 18 Importance of In-Memory Analysis by Vendor Category
IB51811
Although not a top priority overall (number 5 out of 9), Mobile computing holds the greatest importance to the Retail & Wholesale vertical industry (Figure 19). We can confirm this as a result of our own recent Mobile BI research and case studies. Other vertical industries that view Mobile Business Intelligence as important include Technology and Consulting. In contrast, Healthcare, Financial Services, and Government view Mobile as less important. Anecdotally, the Executive and Sales & Marketing functions have the most interest in Mobile BI.
Importance of Mobile by Industry

100%
12% 13% 14% 7% 11% 21% 18% 12% 4% 8%
80%
26% 35%
15%
21% 28% 34%
33%
28%
60%
44%
44%
40%
42% 43% 38% 35%
45%
37%
47%
20%
27% 19% 10%
37% 21% 13%

Financial Services Health Care Retail & Wholesale
26% 18%
13%
Technology Manufacturing Government
0%
Overall Consulting Other
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 19 Importance of Mobile by Industry
IB51811
Although a lower priority overall (7 out of 9), Big Data holds greater interest for the largest organizations of 10,000 employees or more (Figure 20). Not surprisingly, small and mid-sized organizations have the least interest in Big Data. Anecdotally, R&D, as a function, has the most interest in Big Data.
Importance of Big Data by Size of Organization

100%
11% 8% 8% 18% 8% 14% 18%
80%
27%
25%
21% 32% 26% 25% 39%
60%
29% 28% 32% 23% 26% 24%
40%
27%
20%
33%
38%
40% 29%
37%
37% 16%
0%
Overall 1 - 100 101 - 1,000 1,001 - 2,000 2,001 - 5,0005,001 - 10,000 More than 10,000
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 20 Importance of Big Data by Size of Organization
IB51811
Big Data appears to hold the greatest interest in Asia and Latin America, followed by North America (Figure 21). It has lower interest in EMEA and Australia/NZ. This phenomenon may be due to the close alignment of Big Data with Open Source technologies such as Hadoop and MapReduce, which have high acceptance outside of North America.
Importance of Big Data by Region

100% 11% 8% 17% 13% 12% 6% 16% 80% 28% 29% 38% 60% 53% 28% 40% 25% 30% 25% 23%
38%
55% 20% 33% 28% 38% 33% 13% 0%
Overall
3%
Asia- Pacific EMEA Latin America North America Australia-NZ
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 21 Importance of Big Data by Region
IB51811
Although a somewhat lower order priority to respondents (8 out of 9), Cloud and Software-as-a-Service generate a great deal of buzz in the marketplace. As we can see in Figure 22, it seems to resonate more so with the Sales & Marketing function than all others. The Finance and IT functions are less inclined. This is (presumably) due to concerns surrounding security, privacy and control.
Importance of Cloud by Function

100%
11% 8% 6% 15% 15% 16% 14%
80%
19% 26% 24%
60%
36%
35% 50% 32%
40%
40%
20%
34%
40% 29% 19% 30%
0%
Overall Information Technology Finance Sales & Marketing Other
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 22 Importance of Cloud/SaaS by Function

As expected, smaller organizations appear most interested in Cloud and SaaS in relation to Business Intelligence (Figure 23). This is likely due to anticipated cost savings and rapid implementation times, which are features most often ascribed to cloud-based solutions. With few exceptions, larger organizations are less inclined to embrace Cloud/SaaS Business Intelligence solutions.
IB51811
Importance of Cloud by Size of Organization

100%
8% 13% 10% 11% 3% 0% 12% 10% 18% 3%
80%
20% 24%
21% 28%
18%
60%
29% 29%
51% 27%
22%
31%
40%
60% 50%
20%
43% 34%
43% 34%
48%
0%
Overall 1 - 100 101 - 1,000 1,001 - 2,000 2,001 - 5,000 5,001 - 10,000 More than 10,000
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 23 Importance of Cloud/SaaS by Size of Organization
IB51811
When examining interest by industry, the Technology vertical was by far the most interested in Cloud/SaaS BI solutions (Figure 24). In sharp contrast, Government, Retail & Wholesale and Financial Services had the lowest level of interest.
Importance of Cloud by Industry

100%
11% 8% 6% 9% 4% 12% 17% 7% 4% 4% 9%
80%
19%
28%
21%
34%
20%
18%
44%
60%
36% 38%
35% 33%
45% 26% 36% 43%
40%
23% 48%
20%
34% 28%
42%
37%
38% 30% 17%
37%
0%
Overall Consulting Financial Services Health Care Retail & Wholesale Technology Manufacturing Government Other
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 24 Importance of Cloud/SaaS by Industry
IB51811
Although the initiative with the lowest level of general interest (9 out of 9), it had higher interest within small and mid-sized organizations (Figure 25). In contrast, larger organizations tended to have less interest in Open Source BI. Anecdotally, among functions, R&D had the stronger interest in Open Source BI.
Importance of Open Source by Size of Organization

100%
8% 13% 10% 11% 3% 0% 12% 10% 18% 3%
80%
20% 24%
21% 28%
18%
60%
29% 29%
51% 27%
22%
31%
40%
60% 50%
20%
43% 34%
43% 34%
48%
0%
Overall 1 - 100 101 - 1,000 1,001 - 2,000 2,001 - 5,000 5,001 - 10,000 More than 10,000
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 25 Importance of Open Source by Organization Size

When looking at open source BI by industry (Figure 26), the Technology and Government verticals had the strongest interest. Financial Services and Retail & Wholesale had among the lowest interest.
IB51811
Importance of Open Source by Industry

100%
8% 6% 5% 18% 7% 5% 20% 6% 15% 19% 23% 7% 4%
80%
20%
20%
18%
20%
25%
60%
29% 29% 31% 41%
27%
28% 23% 37%
40%
24%
20%
43%
43%
48% 34%
48% 30%
48% 41%
49%
0%
Overall Consulting Financial Services Health Care Retail & Wholesale Technology Manufacturing Government Other
Unimportant
Somewhat Important
Very Important
Critical
Figure 26 Importance of Open Source by Industry
Key Takeaways: Among the most important related technologies/initiatives was Integration with operational processes, Data mining and advanced algorithms and In-memory analysis. Other technologies showed demand in specific segments including Mobile, Big Data, Open Source, and Software-as-a-Service.

Budget and Spend Plans and Trends
IB51811
This year we expanded our study to include budget and spending plans (Figure 27). To this end, we asked about increases in expenditures by different classes of solutions and the allocation of budget by function. These include traditional BI software licenses, Open Source BI, Software-as-a-Service BI, and services from BI software vendors and third party providers.
Spend by License/Service Type

50% More than 10% Increase 40% 10% Increase 30%
5% Increase
20%
5% Decrease
10%
10% Decrease More than 10% Decrease
0%
-10% Open Source BI SW SaaS BI Services from SW Vendor Services from 3rd Pty Traditional BI SW Other
Figure 27 Business Intelligence Spend by License/Service Type
IB51811
The majority of increase in spending will be allocated to traditional software licenses (Figure 28). This doesnt come as a surprise since this has been the dominant model for decades. This category is also seeing the greatest decline. In contrast, Open Source and SaaS BI are seeing important, albeit, modest investment. Additionally, 63% of respondents reported budget increases in at least one BI area. 31% of respondents had BI budget increases of more than 10% in at least one area. Those respondents were more than twice as likely to be using their current product for less than one year (and less likely to be using it for more than 5 years). They were also more likely to think that software-as-a-service or cloud computing is important. There were no differences by vendor category, region, industry, function, or size. There is also very strong demand (and increased spending) for consulting services most especially from the BI software vendors, followed by independent professional service providers. Having spoken to a number of vendors, they have shared that customers are increasing their demand for services. This phenomenon can be explained by at least two factors: smaller deployments growing into more complex and larger deployments and user-based deployments continuing to expand without the needed assistance of an internal IT function.
Departments with BI Budget Allocations

Finance IT Department C Level Executive Sales Marketing Spend Research and Development Human Resources Distribution Manufacturing 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Figure 28 Departments with Any Business Intelligence Spending
IB51811
When examining budgets, the Finance function, followed by IT, C-Level Executives, and Sales were most often allocated some percentage for Business Intelligence (Figure 28). When we look more closely (Figure 29), we see that IT will receive the lions share of BI budget for 2011, followed by Sales, Finance, R&D and C-Level Executives. The lowest BI budget allocations were for Human Resources and Distribution. With the shift towards business deployment of BI, we expect that budget allocations will change accordingly.
Percent of 2011 BI Spend by Department

IT Department Sales Finance Research and Development C Level Executive Manufacturing Marketing Distribution Human Resources 53.1% 53.5% 58.5% 69.2% 68.9% 71.4% 72.1% 77.0% 86.1% 18.8% 33.1% 27.7% 13.2% 17.5% 22.0% 21.0% 14.8% 28.2% 13.4% 13.8% 17.6% 13.6% 6.6% 6.9% 8.1%
n= 309 n= 159 n= 325 n= 286 n= 269 n= 135
n= 233
n= 91 n= 144
11.1%2.8%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1% to 20%
21% to 40%
41% or more
Figure 29 Percentage of 2011 BI Spend by Department (among departments with spend)
Key Takeaways: A total of 63% of respondents reported budget increases in at least one BI area and 31% of respondents had increases of more than 10% in at least one area. Growth in spending for 2011 will favor traditional Business Intelligence software licenses, followed by services from BI vendors and third parties. Finance was the function that had budget allocated most frequently for BI, but IT and Sales had the largest allocation within most organizations.
IB51811
Market Segment Analysis

Market Segment Analysis
For the purpose of analysis and rankings, vendors have been grouped into four categories, based on general market profiles. These categories are: Titans, Established Pure-plays, Emerging vendors and Open Source vendors.
IB51811
Titans include the largest global enterprise software vendors with Business Intelligence offerings. Established Pure-play vendors include larger vendors that are primarily focused upon Business Intelligence software and solutions. Emerging vendors may fall into one of several categories, including SaaS, visualization tools, desktop tools, etc. Open Source BI vendors subscribe to a community model offering some software components at no cost, with a commercial offering available for a fee. When examining alignment by corporate function, the Emerging segment has the highest percentage of business adopters versus all other categories (Figure 30). In contrast, all other segments seemed most aligned with the IT function.
Vendor Category by Function

100%
32% 28% 40% 4% 7% 13% 10% 61% 62% 37% 55% 7% 6% 13% 6% 25% 26%
80%
60%
10% 8%
Other Sales and Marketing Finance Information Technology
40%
20%
0%
Figure 30 - Market Segment Alignment - Business vs. IT
IB51811
When examining the market from an industry perspective, the inclination towards one BI segment over the other is less well defined (Figure 31).
Vendor Category by Industry

100%
20% 25%
27%
27%
32%
80%
9% 5% 6% 5% 3% 6% 14% 25% 16% 9% 12% 8% 14% 6% 13% 13%
Open Source
9% 4%
Other
3% 6% 9% 8%
Government Manufacturing Technology Retail & Wholesale Health Care Financial Services Consulting
60%
14%
9%
40%
13%
18% 9%
17%
6% 14% 17% 19% 10%

Pureplay Titan
20%
12%
12%
Emerging
0%
Overall
Figure 31 - BI Market Segment Alignment by Industry
The Financial Services segment appears to favor Established Pure-play vendors, while Healthcare aligns most closely with Emerging vendors. Retail & Wholesale have adopted Established Pure-plays, followed by Emerging vendors, while the Technology vertical has strong adoption of Open Source. In Government there appears to be a split preference for both Established Pure-plays and Open Source BI.
IB51811
Vendor Category by Organization Size

100%
7% 21% 7% 7% 9% 10% 4% 8% 9% 2% 8% 6% 43% 30% 15% 13% 17% 6% 11% 17% 25% 35%
80%
60%
More than 10,000 5,001 - 10,000 2,001 - 5,000 1,001 - 2,000 101 - 1,000 1 - 100
40%
27%
21% 16%
20%
33% 27%
35% 17% 18%
0%
Figure 32 - Market Segment Alignment by Organization Size
When looking at size of organization (Figure 32), Titans and Established Pure-play products are distributed across a wide range of organization sizes and are dominant in the largest organizations. In contrast, Emerging and Open Source BI products have a strong concentration of adoption within small and mid-sized organizations and in a minority of larger organizations.
IB51811
If we look at the market segments by the age of the implementation, it appears that Open Source and Emerging BI vendors have the youngest base of customers, with the largest percentage of implementations within the last 3 years. In contrast, Titans and Established Pure-play vendors have a more mature base of customers, with the majority implemented more than 3 years ago.
BI Adoption Over Time by Vendor Type

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 38% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Open Source Emerging Pureplay Titan 26% 21% 12% 23% 19% 19% 29% 36% 30% 28% 17% 19% More than 10 years 6 - 10 years 3 - 5 years 1 - 2 years Less than 1 year 3% 5% 10% 19% 23% 7%
15%
Figure 33 - Market Segment Alignment by Implementation Age
Key Takeaways: Of the four Business Intelligence sub-segments, all but Emerging products are adopted predominately by the IT function. Titans and Established Pureplays have the broadest distribution across all organization sizes, while Open Source and Emerging vendors were more dominant in smaller ones. And, Open Source and Emerging vendors appear to have the youngest customer bases with the largest percentage of adoption within the past 2+ years.
IB51811
Industry and Vendor Analysis

Industry and Vendor Analysis:
IB51811
In this section we will review Business Intelligence vendor and market performance, using our trademark 32-criteria evaluation model.
Scoring Criteria
The criteria for the various industry and vendor rankings are grouped into six categories including Sales/acquisition experience, Value for price paid, Quality and usefulness of product, Quality of technical support, Quality and value of consulting, and whether vendor is recommended. The detailed criteria are as follows:
Sales/acquisition experience o Professionalism o Product Knowledge o Understanding business/needs o Responsiveness o Flexibility/Accommodation o Business Practices o Contractual terms and conditions o Follow up after the sale Value for price paid (Excellent Poor) Quality and usefulness of product o Robustness/sophistication of technology o Completeness of functionality o Reliability of technology o Scalability o Integration of components within product o Integration with 3rd party technologies o Overall Usability o Ease of installation o Ease of administration o Customization and Extensibility o Ease of upgrade/migration to new versions o Online forums and documentation Quality of technical support o Professionalism o Product Knowledge o Responsiveness o Continuity of personnel o Time to resolve problems Quality and value of consulting services o Professionalism o Product Knowledge o Experience o Continuity o Value Whether vendor is recommended (Yes/No) Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC 50

Overall Industry Performance
In this section of the findings, we examine the performance of the entire Business Intelligence software industry, using our 32-criteria model.
IB51811
When examining the Sales/acquisition process at an industry level (Figure 34), the areas of greatest satisfaction include Sales product knowledge, and professionalism. The areas of lowest Sales satisfaction include Contractual terms and conditions, Follow up after the sale and Understanding business needs. These scores are in line with the findings for 2010 suggesting limited progress.
Sales/Acquisition Experience
Product Knowledge 2.7% 16.0% 35.3% 45.4%
Professionalism 1.7% 18.1%
39.6%
39.9%
Responsiveness
5.5%
21.7%
35.9%
35.2%
Business Practices 4.0%
25.9%
41.2%
27.8%
Flexibility/Accommodation
5.7%
26.9%
34.8%
31.2%
Understanding our business/needs 4.7%
29.2%
37.0%
28.4%
Follow-up after the sale
7.6%
23.8%
38.4%
27.9%
Contractual terms and conditions
5.4%
33.5%
36.3%
23.2%
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very Poor
Poor
Adequate
Very Good
Excellent
Figure 34 Industry Performance Sales/Acquisition Experience
IB51811
For the Value dimension, we compared current user responses with those from 2010. In 2011, users reported greater value from their Business Intelligence solutions, than in 2010 (Figure 35).
Value for Price Paid: 2010 vs. 2011

80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
Great Value
Good Value
30%
Poor Value Very Poor Value
20%
10%
0%
-10%
2010
2011
Figure 35 - Industry Performance - Value: 2010 vs. 2011
This increase in perceived value is likely due to the maturation of the many new 2010 implementations now yielding greater value than in their very early stages.
IB51811
Taking a look at industry performance related to product (Figure 36), the areas of greatest satisfaction include: Robustness/Sophistication of technology, Scalability and Overall Usability. The areas of lowest satisfaction include Integration with 3 rd party technology, Online training, forums and documentation and Customization and Extensibility. These scores are in line with the findings for 2010 suggesting limited industry progress.
Quality and Usefulness of Product

Robustness/Sophistication of technology 1.8% 19.1% Scalability 2.6% 21.4% Overall usability 3.7% 18.9% Reliability of technology 2.6% 21.3% Integration of components within product 3.6% Ease of installation 5.5% Completeness of functionality 3.1% Ease of administration Ease of upgrade/migration to new versions 6.0% 7.9% 23.8% 25.2% 24.1% 27.5% 26.5% 32.6% 32.8% 34.6% 44.2% 41.3% 42.8% 43.7% 40.1% 34.7% 48.1% 35.1% 33.6% 36.9% 32.7% 34.6% 34.4% 34.5% 34.0% 32.2% 31.5% 33.6% 24.2% 30.4% 29.3% 24.6% 25.5% 22.4%
Customization and Extensibility 4.1% Online training, forums and documentation Integration with 3rd party technologies 7.7% 6.6%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very Poor
Poor
Adequate
Very Good
Excellent
Figure 36 - Industry Performance: Quality and Usefulness of Products
IB51811
For 2011, Product knowledge and Professionalism were the two top areas of customer satisfaction for Technical Support (Figure 37). This was also the case in 2010 when Professionalism was in first place. At the bottom of the list are Time to resolve problems and Continuity of personnel two areas that continue to dog the industry.
Technical Support
Product knowledge 3.5% 18.0% 35.7% 42.4%
36.9%
41.8%
Responsiveness 4.6%
22.2%
35.6%
36.5%
Continuity of Personnel
5.8%
22.7%
35.5%
34.8%
Time to resolve problems
7.0%
27.6%
37.7%
26.4%
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very Poor
Poor
Adequate
Very Good
Excellent
Figure 37 - Industry Performance: Technical Support
IB51811
For 2011, there was no change in the industrys perceived performance for BI software vendor consulting services (Figure 38). The areas of greatest satisfaction include consultant Product knowledge and Professionalism. Areas of greatest dissatisfaction include Value for the price and Continuity of consulting personnel.
Consulting Services
Product knowledge 2.4% 16.1%
39.9%
40.5%
41.0%
36.7%
Experience 2.6% 19.1%
41.2%
36.0%
Continuity
4.7%
24.4%
36.0%
32.9%
Value
5.8%
26.4%
37.9%
27.7%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Very Poor
Poor
Adequate
Very Good
Excellent
Figure 38 - Industry Performance: BI Vendor Consulting
IB51811
On a more positive note, respondents were more likely to recommend their BI software vendor in 2011 than in 2010 (Figure 39). For 2011, only 5% said that they would not recommend their vendor versus 9% in 2010.
Recommend: 2010 vs. 2011

100%
80%
60% 91% 95%
40%
20%
9% 0% 2010 No Yes
5% 2011
Figure 39 - Industry Performance: Recommended

Vendor Stacked Rankings:
IB51811
In this section we offer stacked rankings of Business Intelligence software vendors. Vendors were ranked using 32 different criteria, on a 5-point scale for each. Criteria covered sales /acquisition experience (8), value for price paid (1), technology/product (12), technical support (5), consulting services (5) and whether they would recommend this vendor (1). The result is a stacked ranking with an average score for every one of the six categories and an overall average score for each vendor. As we begin to explore vendor performance in more detail, its important to understand the scale that we used in scoring the industry and vendors: 5.0 = Excellent 4.0 = Very Good 3.0 = Adequate 2.0 = Poor 1.0 = Very Poor Vendors have been organized into Titans, Established Pure-Plays, Emerging or Open Source categories. Within each of these groups vendors have similar traits and, as a result, similar score-average ranges. Average scores range from the highest (4.00 - 4.57) in Emerging to the lowest with the Titans (3.30 3.71), with Established Pure-Plays (3.55 4.29) and Open Source (3.83 4.15) in the middle. So, while comparisons can (and no doubt will) be made between these sub-segment peer groups, its not always a reasonable comparison. Based on our scoring methodology, all vendors performed at a level that is considered more than adequate for all categories of criteria. *Please note that Average Score is the mathematical mean of all items included in vendor ratings. Each column in the chart represents a scale consisting of varying numbers of items (for example "Sales" is a scale consisting of 8 items, while "Value" for price is 1 single item). As such, each column is weighted differently (based upon the number of items represented and the number of respondents rating those items) in calculating the overall Average rating. The Average Score cannot be calculated by simply averaging across the subscale scores.
Business Intelligence Titans

As you might expect, the Titans (Figure 40) are the largest vendors, with extensive product and service offerings including Business Intelligence. In all cases these vendors have acquired Business Intelligence vendors (e.g., Oracle and Hyperion, IBM

and Cognos, SAP and BusinessObjects). Vendors in this category include: IBM/Cognos, Microsoft, Oracle and SAP/BusinessObjects.
IB51811
Figure 40 - Business Intelligence Titans - Stacked Rankings
Established Pure-play Business Intelligence Vendors

Established Pure-Play vendors (Figure 41) are focused primarily upon Business Intelligence software and services and have typically been in business for 15 + years with well established customer bases and revenue streams. Several are publicly held. These include Information Builders, MicroStrategy, QlikTech and The SAS Institute.
Figure 41 - Business Intelligence Established Pure-plays - Stacked Rankings

Emerging Business Intelligence Vendors
IB51811
The Emerging vendors (Figure 42) are typically younger than the other two categories and offer unique and often innovative business models, technologies and/or services. This category includes: Dimensional Insight, PivotLink, Spotfire (Tibco), Tableau and Yellowfin (new this year). Arcplan, Birst, and Good Data also belong in this category, but could not be ranked due to the small number of completed surveys.
Figure 42 Business Intelligence Emerging Vendors Stacked Rankings
Open Source Business Intelligence Vendors

This year we separated out the Open Source BI vendors into their own category (Figure 43). These vendors include Actuate/BIRT, Jaspersoft and Pentaho. Jedox/Palo also fits into this category, but could not be ranked due to the relatively small number of completed surveys.
IB51811
Figure 43 Open Source Business Intelligence Vendors Stacked Rankings
After you have reviewed the stacked rankings of vendors, carefully examine the detailed, vendor-specific rankings for a more complete perspective and deeper understanding of individual vendors strengths and weaknesses.
Detailed Vendor Scores:

In this section, we offer detailed vendor scores. Using the 32 criteria from the survey (Page 50), we compare each vendors performance to their direct peer group and to the average for all vendors (all records in the study population). In the detailed scores that follow, the criteria begin at the top of each chart with Sales Professionalism and proceed clockwise through Recommended (Figure 44).
IB51811
Sales Professionalism Recommend5.00 Sales Product Knowledge Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Consult Experience Consult Product Knowledge Consult Professionalism 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 Support Time to resolve problems Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism 0.00 Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability Integration of components within Online training, forums and Integration with 3rd party Ease of upgrade/migration to new Overall Usability Customization and Extensibility Ease of installation Ease of administration Sales Contractual terms and Sales Follow up after the sale Value for Price Sales Flexibility/Accommodation Sales Business Practices
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 44 - Sample Vendor Detailed Scoring Chart
IB51811
Actuate/BIRT Performance
Sales Professionalism Recommend Sales Product Knowledge 5.00 Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Sales Flexibility/Accommodation 4.00 3.50 Consult Experience Sales Business Practices 3.00 Consult Product Knowledge Sales Contractual terms and 2.50 2.00 Consult Professionalism Sales Follow up after the sale 1.50 1.00 Value for Price 0.50 Support Time to resolve problems 0.00 Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability
Integration of components Online training, forums and Integration with 3rd party Ease of upgrade/migration to Overall Usability Customization and Extensibility Ease of installation Ease of administration
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 45 Actuate/BIRT Detailed Score
As a member of the Open Source market segment, Actuate/BIRT is in the top position. Actuate/BIRT exceeded its peer group and the overall sample average for all Technical Support and Product metrics by a wide margin. In all other areas it was in line with both the peer and overall sample average. Its 2011 performance improved in the areas of Sales, Value, and Recommended.
IB51811
Dimensional Insight Performance
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 46 Dimensional Insight Detailed Score
A member of the Emerging market segment, Dimensional Insight achieved the same high score as in 2010, securing the number two spot in the segment for 2011. It exceeded its peer group and the overall sample for practically all metrics. It was among an elite few that were recommended by 100% of customer respondents.
IB51811
IBM Performance
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 47 - IBM/Cognos Detailed Ranking
A member of the Titan market segment, IBM/Cognos was generally in line with the peer average, except for Product where it generally exceeded the peer group. It was ranked number one in its peer group for Product and Customer Recommendation. Its 2011 performance improved in the areas of Value, Product and Recommended.
IB51811
Information Builders Performance
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 48 - Information Builders Detailed Score
A member of the Established Pure-Play market segment, Information Builders achieved the top position for a second year in a row. It exceeded the peer group average for virtually all metrics and was above the average for the entire sample. It was also one of a very few vendors to improve its overall score from 2010 and especially in the areas of Value and Support.
IB51811
Jaspersoft Performance
Sales Professionalism Recommend Sales Product Knowledge 5.00 Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Sales Flexibility/Accommodation 4.00 3.50 Consult Experience Sales Business Practices 3.00 Consult Product Knowledge Sales Contractual terms and 2.50 2.00 Consult Professionalism Sales Follow up after the sale 1.50 1.00 Value for Price 0.50 Support Time to resolve 0.00 Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 49 - Jaspersoft Detailed Score
A member of the Open Source market segment, Jaspersoft is in line when compared to the overall sample and average of its peers - for Sales, most Consulting metrics and Value. It exceeded its peers in Sales Professionalism, Business Practices and Contractual Terms and Conditions. For Technical Support it was below both averages.
IB51811
Microsoft Performance
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 50 - Microsoft Detailed Score
A member of the Titan market segment, Microsoft is in third place for the second year. It was average compared to its peers with the exception of Consulting and Technical Support, where it was above average for its peer group.
IB51811
MicroStrategy Performance
Sales Professionalism Recommend Sales Product Knowledge 5.00 Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Sales Flexibility/Accommodation 4.00 3.50 Consult Experience Sales Business Practices 3.00 Consult Product Knowledge Sales Contractual terms and 2.50 2.00 Consult Professionalism Sales Follow up after the sale 1.50 1.00 Value for Price 0.50 Support Time to resolve 0.00 Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 51 - MicroStrategy Detailed Score
A member of the Established Pure-Play market segment, MicroStrategy was generally in line with the average for the entire sample and its peer group. It was above both averages - for several Product metrics: especially Robustness/Sophistication and Completeness of Functionality. It received the highest Recommended score amongst its peers.
IB51811
Oracle Performance
Sales Professionalism Recommend5.00 Sales Product Knowledge Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Consult Experience Consult Product Knowledge Consult Professionalism 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Sales Sales Business Practices Sales Contractual terms and Sales Follow up after the sale Value for Price
Support Time to resolve Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism
Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability Integration of components
Online training, forums and Integration with 3rd party Ease of upgrade/migration to Overall Usability Customization and Extensibility Ease of installation Ease of administration
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 52 - Oracle Detailed Score
A member of the Titan market segment, Oracle was ranked number one overall - for its segment for 2010. It retains the number one position for 2011. It generally exceeded the peer average and was ranked number one in its peer group for both Sales and Value. Its 2011 performance improved in the areas of Sales, Value, and Product.
IB51811
Pentaho Performance
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 53 - Pentaho Detailed Score
A member of the Open Source market segment, Pentaho is in the number two position for this market segment. It was generally in line with its peer group and the overall sample average. It exceeded both averages for several Sales metrics, and was below average for several Product metrics.
IB51811
PivotLink Performance
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 54 PivotLink Detailed Score
A member of the Emerging market segment, PivotLink maintained the number 4 spot from 2010. It generally exceeded the overall sample and was at the peer average for other metrics, except for Product where it was generally below the overall average. It exceeded the peer and overall averages for a number of Sales metrics.
IB51811
QlikTech Performance
Sales Professionalism Recommend5.00 Sales Product Knowledge Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Sales Flexibility/Accommodation 4.00 3.50 Consult Experience Sales Business Practices 3.00 Consult Product Knowledge Sales Contractual terms and 2.50 2.00 Consult Professionalism Sales Follow up after the sale 1.50 1.00 Value for Price 0.50 Support Time to resolve 0.00 Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 55 - QlikTech Detailed Score
Beginning this year we moved QlikTech from the Emerging to the Established PurePlay market segment where it is in the number two position. This transition to Established Pure-Play was due to its recent public offering and substantial growth. As an Established Pure-Play, QlikTech was generally in line with the sample and peer average for most criteria. In several areas of Product and Consulting, it exceeded the peer group and overall sample average.
IB51811
SAP Performance
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 56 - SAP/Business Objects Detailed Score
A member of the Titan market segment, SAP/BusinessObjects generally averaged below its peers, with the exception of several Sales and Technical Support criteria, where it was in line with its peer group. Its 2011 performance improved in the areas of Product and Recommended.
IB51811
SAS Institute Performance
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 57 - SAS Institute Detailed Score
A member of the Established Pure-Play market segment, The SAS Institute was generally below average when compared to its peer group and the overall sample. For several Technical Support metrics, it was in line with the peer and overall sample averages.
IB51811
Tableau Performance
Sales Professionalism Recommend5.00 Sales Product Knowledge Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Consult Experience Consult Product Knowledge Consult Professionalism 4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Sales Flexibility/Accommodation Sales Business Practices Sales Contractual terms and Sales Follow up after the sale Value for Price
Support Time to resolve problems Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism
Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability Integration of components
Online training, forums and Integration with 3rd party Ease of upgrade/migration to Overall Usability Customization and Extensibility Ease of installation Ease of administration
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 58 - Tableau Detailed Score
A member of the Emerging market segment, Tableau showed strong improvement for 2011, moving from number five in 2010 to the top spot. It exceeded both its peer group and the average for the overall sample - for nearly every metric - and was among an elite group recommended by 100% of customer respondents.
IB51811
Tibco Spotfire Performance
Sales Professionalism Recommend5.00 Sales Product Knowledge Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Sales Flexibility/Accommodation 4.00 3.50 Consult Experience Sales Business Practices 3.00 Consult Product Knowledge Sales Contractual terms and 2.50 Consult Professionalism 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Sales Follow up after the sale Value for Price
Support Time to resolve problems Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism
Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability
Integration of components within Online training, forums and Integration with 3rd party Ease of upgrade/migration to Overall Usability Customization and Extensibility Ease of installation Ease of administration
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 59 - Tibco/Spotfire Detailed Score
A member of the Emerging market segment, Spotfire dropped from the number three position in 2010 to number five in 2011. It generally exceeded the average for the overall sample but was generally below its peer average for most metrics. In the area of Robustness & Sophistication of Technology, it exceeded both the peer and overall averages.
IB51811
Yellowfin Performance
Sales Professionalism Recommend5.00 Sales Product Knowledge Sales Understanding our Consult Value Sales Responsiveness 4.50 Consult Continuity Sales Flexibility/Accommodation 4.00 3.50 Consult Experience Sales Business Practices 3.00 Consult Product Knowledge Sales Contractual terms and 2.50 2.00 Consult Professionalism Sales Follow up after the sale 1.50 1.00 Value for Price 0.50 Support Time to resolve problems 0.00 Support Continuity of personnel Support Responsiveness Support Product Knowledge Support Professionalism Robustness/sophistication of Completeness of functionality Reliability of technology Scalability
Vendor
Average
Peers
Figure 60 - Yellowfin Detailed Score
A new member of the Emerging market segment, Yellowfin landed in the number three spot. It generally exceeded the average for the overall sample and was in line with its peers for most metrics. Several Sales, Product, and Support metrics were slightly above both peer and overall averages.
IB51811
Appendix - The Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Survey Instrument
IB51811
IB51811
IB51811
IB51811
IB51811
IB51811
IB51811

2011 Wisdom Crowds

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

2011 Wisdom Crowds

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

2011 Edition Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Study Findings and Analysis Report

May 18, 2011

Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

Licensed to Information Builders

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Howard Dresner Chief Research Officer Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

About Dresner Advisory Services:

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Survey Design and Criteria:

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Awareness, Recruitment & Data Gathering:

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

29% 30% 27% 27% 27%

21% 21% 20%

Figure 1 - Organization Size

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

61% 60% 50%

Figure 2 - Functions Represented

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

30% 30% 27%

20% 15% 14%

13% 12% 10%

Figure 3 - Industries Represented

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Figure 4 Geographies Represented

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

Analysis & Trends

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

BI Adoption by Function - All Regions

Sales and Marketing

Figure 5- Business Intelligence Adoption by Function / Time

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

BI Adoption by Function - North America

Figure 6 -BI Adoption by Function / Time North America

Copyright 2011 Dresner Advisory Services, LLC

2011 Wisdom of Crowds Business Intelligence Market Study TM

BI Adoption by Function - EMEA

Figure 7 - BI Adoption by Function / Time EMEA