Enterprise software usability and digital transformation

KEY QUESTIONS:
What unique usability and digital
transformation barriers to middle
market companies face, and how can
they be surmounted?
9
How does enterprise software
usability impact readiness for digital
transformation?
5
Would senior employees change jobs
due to poor software usability?
7
KEY QUESTIONS:
ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND
DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION
HOW USABILITY CONNECTS PEOPLE AND PROCESSES
IN INDUSTRIAL SETTINGS FOR ENHANCED AGILITY
IFS PRIMARY RESEARCH REPORT
Charles Rathmann, Senior Marketing Communications Analyst, North America, IFS, October 2017

CONTENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.................................................................... 3
KEY FINDING 1:.............................................................................. 5
ERP Means Excel Runs Production.................................................. 5
KEY FINDING 2:.............................................................................. 7
The Digital Transformation-Usability Connection.............................. 7
KEY FINDING #3............................................................................. 9
Poor Usability Can Affect Personnel Retention................................ 9
KEY FINDING #4........................................................................... 10
Middle Market Challenges to Usability.......................................... 10
KEY FINDING #5........................................................................... 12
Poor Usability May Be a Barrier to Servitization............................ 12
METHODOLOGY............................................................................ 14
RESULTS...................................................................................... 15
ABOUT IFS................................................................................... 19

3 ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE USABILITY AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION
ENTERPRISE SOFTWARE
USABILITY AND DIGITAL
TRANSFORMATION
BY CHARLES RATHMANN SENIOR MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS ANALYST,
NORTH AMERICA, IFS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Digital Transformation may be defined in a number of different ways by
analysts or enterprise software vendors. But at its heart is the idea that as
we use more digital technologies, those technologies change the way we live
and, more pointedly, the way we conduct commerce and do business.
Businesses are introducing new technologies in innovative ways to reduce
cost, create new revenue opportunities and improve the customer experience.
In complex industrial settings like those served by IFS, digital transformation
can be challenging. While retail has been transformed through e-commerce
and transportation transformed by services like Lyft and Uber, an engineer-to-
order manufacturer, asset-intensive business or complex field service
operation may have to apply technology very differently in order to realize
transformational change.
In this study of industrial executives in North America, we will look how
enterprise software usability affects the ability of these industrial organizations
to digitally transform their operation. Usability itself may be hard to define,
but may encompass:
• The degree to which the software is intuitive, so that with basic training
end-users can perform day-to-day business functions.
• The degree to which enterprise software includes functionality that meets
the core needs of the business.
• Whether or not different modules of enterprise software share the same
navigational or functional conventions. Enterprise resource planning (ERP)
suites made up of acquired products or white-labeled products from other
software vendors may present usability challenges for those accessing
more than a single part of the overall solution.
• To what extent the software is easily configurable. As the business environ-
ment and enterprise needs change, enterprise software must be able to
change with the business. Software lacking configurability, or requiring
extensive consulting or programming to effect changes, may be an impedi-
ment to, rather than a help in, digital transformation.
In this study, IFS found that software usability and a perceived readiness for
digital transformation were closely linked. Respondents were asked to what
extent their enterprise software prepared them for digital transformation, and
their answer to this question had a stronger correlation to either high or low
ratings of enterprise software usability than did company size, industry, age
of the respondent, the type of enterprise software used, vertical industry or
IFS found that software
usability and a perceived
readiness for digital
transformation were closely
linked. Respondents were
asked to what extent their
enterprise software prepared
them for digital transformation,
and their answer to this
question had a stronger
correlation to either high or
low ratings of enterprise
software usability than did
company size, industry, age
of the respondent, the type
of enterprise software used,
vertical industry or other
criteria.

other criteria. So we can say definitively that enterprise software usability is
a key component in preparing for digital transformation.
This may be because, as stated, the ability to change and reconfigure an
enterprise software system may be a key component in usability. But if enter-
prise software is hard to use or does not contain appropriate functionality,
end users will rely on systems outside of the enterprise software. This
creates exactly the type of data silos and disconnected processes that enter-
prise software is designed to eliminate, which makes changing the organiza-
tion in a structured and organized fashion all the more difficult.
This study encompasses usability of enterprise resource planning (ERP),
enterprise asset management (EAM), field service management (FSM),
customer relationship management (CRM) and supply chain management
(SCM) software.
“Traditionally, enterprise software
has been all about structure. It is
very defined. It is very rigorous. It
does things in a predefined way, and
this enables managerial control and
visibility. But the real world does
not work that way. The world is in
a rapid state of change—digital
transformation—and business is
now online and dynamic. Excel is
the ultimate agile system, but it
is very unstructured. To facilitate
digital transformation in these
industrial settings, enterprise
software must find a middle ground
between the old school, top-down
control and the ‘chaos rules’
approach of Excel.
Rick Veague,Chief Technical Officer,
North America, IFS
An enterprise system must be
agile enough to meet the demands
of digital transformation while
preserving governance and control
of data.

KEY FINDING 1:
Lacking Usability, ERP Stands for Excel Runs Production
Poor usability will often drive users to abandon enterprise software, including
ERP, in favor of desktop and web-based software applications, primarily
Microsoft® Excel®.
In situations where enterprise software usability was poor, a sizable
majority of respondents—88 percent—said they would be likely to use
spreadsheets, with 84 percent citing Microsoft Excel.
Excel was most popular among 18-35-year-olds, with 95 percent citing
the popular spreadsheet product as a workaround when enterprise software
presented usability difficulties. This may be because this age cohort would
have had extensive exposure to Excel in university business school settings,
and would perhaps lean on these skills in their day-to-day work.
Excel Runs Production
PC-based an Web-based Workarounds
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Microsoft Excel
Corporate Email
Microsoft Project
Microsoft Access
Share point
Dropbox
Google Docs
Google Sites
Google Sheets
Google Cloud Connect
IBM Notes/Domino formerly Lotus Notes
Facebook Messenger
Yahoo Messenger
MSN Messenger
Other
None
Managing business process in spreadsheets reduces visibility, gover-
nance and control. So it is imperative that companies specifying or evaluat-
ing enterprise software pay attention to usability. Lacking usability, including
the ability to adapt the software to business processes as they evolve, will
mean users will take the easy way out and rely on products like Excel. The
software must include agile data visualization tools or, again, users will find
other ways to get the information they need outside the system, resulting in
disconnected processes and data silos. And if a virus attack like WannaCry
affects your business, how would you recover if unprotected, distributed
spreadsheets are locked up, bringing your business to its knees? For a num-
ber of reasons, businesses where Excel runs production will experience a
higher risk profile than those with agile, effective enterprise systems.
For a number of reasons,
businesses where Excel runs
production will experience a higher
risk profile than those with agile,
effective enterprise systems.
When enterprise data is kept in
spreadsheets, revision control
becomes an issue, and files
containing proprietary data are often
emailed back and forth, resulting
in a loss of control and security.
An enterprise system must be
agile enough to meet the demands
of digital transformation while
preserving governance and control
of data.”
North America, IFS

Excel Runs Production by Age
100%
95%
90%
85%
80%
75%
70%
18 to 35 years old
Microsoft Excel
36 to 45 years old 46 to 55 years old 56 years old or
older

KEY FINDING 2:
Digital Transformation and Usability Are Inextricably Linked
Usable systems engage people. A consumer application like Facebook is
sticky to the point where it is hard for many of us to stay off of it, and once
we are on, we can lose track of time. The data resulting from the engage-
ments we have with Facebook can be analyzed, monetized and sold to those
who want these types of consumer insights. Enterprise software usability
works much the same way in that data is placed in the system by engaged
users, and this data enables intelligent management of the business, driving
business intelligence and operational intelligence tools.
Lacking this engagement, even a firm mandate from senior management
to use a system of record will not be very successful in ensuring that infor-
mation critical to the enterprise winds up in a central repository used to make
C-level and board-level decisions. The resulting lack of enterprise visibility, as
information winds up in various unconnected silos beyond the visibility of
senior management, can make it difficult to make decisions about holistic
business changes. It can also make it difficult to operationalize those decisions
in the transactional, and systems and execution layers of software used by
the business. If substantial activities are taking place outside of an enter-
prise system of record, in numerous disconnected spreadsheets or point
solutions, changes in business process flows and value streams in enter-
prise software may not carry over into actual practice in the business. The
end result is similar to driving a vehicle on a curvy mountain road with no
windshield or steering. There is no visibility and no control. This may be a
workable approach in smaller businesses where the various stakeholders and
contributors to a business value stream can meet directly on a regular basis.
But for large, distributed teams and those managing time-sensitive projects,
more structured approaches to communication and the business value stream
are required.
When we divide survey respondents into those who said their enterprise
software prepared them very well or somewhat well for digital transformation
(digital transformation leaders) and those who said their software prepared
them not very well or was in impediment (digital transformation laggards), the
two groups responded to usability questions very differently.
While software vendors often focus on the look and feel of the user inter-
face, respondents who say their software is not helping with digital transfor-
mation report usability issues that are instead caused by deficient software
architecture. These digital transformation laggards were more likely to say
their software vendor could enhance usability by improving integration between
modules of the software suite. Functional disconnects between, for instance,
project management and finance or between the quality management and
manufacturing portions of an application can result if a software suite relies
on numerous products that have either been acquired by the software vendor
and rebadged, or, in many cases, enterprise software can include white-
labeled functionality, i.e. software developed and marketed by third-party
vendors and sold as part of the application. In other situations, enterprise
software relies on partners to complete a solution, so essential functionality
may be delivered by multiple third-party independent software vendors (ISVs).
All of these approaches to offering an enterprise solution can result in usability
“Cute-looking software does not
necessarily translate into software
that allows your users to collaborate
and run your business. Usability
is much deeper than a graphical
user interface. The underlying
architecture of the application must
be amenable to supporting agility.”
North America, IFS
• To demonstrate their ability to
support different business
processes and modes of
manufacturing, and encompass
sites that do different things all
in the same business solution.
• About the underlying architecture
of the product you are considering
and how their functionality uses
that architecture to support
change readiness.
ASK SOFTWARE VENDORS:

difficulties as users need to master multiple navigational conventions, process
flows and underlying data structures.
Ease of Use by Digital Transformation Readiness
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Very Easy Somewhat Easy Difficult Very Difficult
DT Leader DT Laggard
Improvement Areas by Digital Transformation Readiness
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Support for
touch
screen/tablets
Real-time
visualizations
of KPIs
Consistency
between
modules
Better
integration
between
modules
Easier/faster
upgrade
Make easier to
align the
software with
business
Other
These solutions comprised of disparate software products can also be barriers
to agility. As a business process changes, it may affect multiple software
products and the integrations between them, requiring expensive services
processes that consume budget and, more importantly, time.
Digital transformation laggards were also almost twice as likely to want
their software vendor to make it easier to align the software to the business.
Enterprise software can generally be changed to conform to shifting business
priorities and new business models. Software changes in these organizations
may require external consultants, and extensive custom programming work.
This can increase the opportunity cost or the timeline required to take advan-
tage of fleeting business opportunities. In many of these scenarios, these
needs that are not met by the current configuration of enterprise software
wind up being addressed with Excel and other point solutions, reducing digital
transformation readiness even further.
“Remember that integrations
between software products from
different companies increase
complexity. A change in one system
might have unanticipated impacts
on the interactions with other
systems. This adds complexity, and
complexity is the enemy of agility.
That is why so many people go
to Excel rather than fix their ERP
system.”
North America, IFS

KEY FINDING #3
Poor Usability Can Affect Personnel Retention
The ability to hire and retain skilled professionals is a critical factor in digital
transformation. Survey data suggests that younger respondents found enter-
prise software easier to use than their older counterparts, perhaps because
they are in more junior positions and performing relatively straightforward tasks.
Perceived Ease of Use by Age
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
36-45 36-45 36-4536-45
When software usability is poor, respondents said they would take a number
of different corrective steps, up to and including changing jobs! The youngest
cohort of 18-35-year-olds are on the one hand digital natives with high expec-
tations of software usability. Only 26 percent said they are definitely or some-
what likely to change jobs over poor software usability, however. This may be
because they are not secure enough in their profession at this stage in their
career, or because they are dealing with relatively straightforward elements of
enterprise software like work orders, field service technician interfaces or
engineering change orders. But 45 percent of the 36-45-year-olds said they
were definitely or somewhat likely to change jobs over poor software usability.
In each of the 46-55-year-old and 56-plus cohorts, 33 percent of the respon-
dents said they were definitely or somewhat likely to change jobs over poor
software usability.
Loss of these skilled professionals lead to the wrong kind of business
disruption as the skills, knowledge, business connections and creative capacity
these people represent walk out the door. But conversely, digital transformation
and the associated more progressive technology environment can be a factor
in hiring and retention. Poor usability for these respondents who may change
jobs is related to the ability of the software to deliver on and facilitate business
goals. Ambitious high-skill employees want to make things happen in the
organization, and poor usability may be a barrier to their achieving their
personal goals. This pattern is borne out in other research. In a recent MIT
Sloan Management Review study, 85 percent of millennials and 75 percent
of baby boomers said they saw it as important to work for a digital leader.1
So enterprise software usability can work both ways. It can repel
experienced and valuable workers when it is bad, even as it serves as an
impediment to digital transformation. That enterprise that “gets” digital
transformation meanwhile becomes a talent magnet.
1
G. C. Kane, D. Palmer, A. N. Phillips, D. Kiron and N. Buckley, “Strategy, Not Technology, Drives
Digital Transformation” MIT Sloan Management Review and Deloitte University Press, July 2015.
“In the younger demographics, they
don’t have the best understanding
of enterprise software. It might not
drive them to change their jobs. The
middle-aged people, who spike in
willingness to change jobs due to
poor usability, should be concerning
because these are the people
driving the business—the movers
and shakers. If business software
is making the company less
competitive, if the company does
not have IT systems that enable
growth, these driven professionals
will go elsewhere. They want to
go to companies that are in the
forefront of their industries that
have a solid IT strategy. They see
this as key to their future success
in their careers.”
North America, IFS

KEY FINDING #4
The Middle Market Has Unique Usability/Digital Transformation
Challenges
Survey data suggests that when it comes to usability, companies in the
middle market, between $100 million and $1 billion in revenue, face more
severe usability challenges than small to medium-sized companies or enter-
prise-level organizations with a billion dollars in revenue or above.
This may be due largely to the degree of complexity these mid-sized
businesses face, including multiple divisions with disparate business models
and far-flung global operations. In order to compete with larger enterprises,
they must operate on as sophisticated a level and, if anything, must exhibit
greater enterprise agility and change-readiness. Their IT resources, in the
meantime, may consist of a handful of full-time equivalents, and they lack
the budget for large systems integration projects each time they make a
change to their enterprise software configuration.
Perceived Usability by Company Revenue
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Less than $50
million
$50 million to
$100 million
$100 million to
$250 million
$250 million to
$500 million
$500 million to
$1 billion
More than $1
billion
When asked where their enterprise software vendor could improve usabili-
ty, respondents with middle market companies were more vocal in a number
of areas than their counterparts at smaller or larger organizations, which may
be indicative of the more challenging environments they find themselves in
with relatively few resources. Almost 80 percent of respondents with compa-
nies with revenue of between $100 and $250 million wanted access to real-
time information on key performance indicators (KPIs). More than 60 percent
of respondents with between $250 million and $500 million in revenue want-
ed more consistent functionality across modules and better integration
between modules.
Companies with more than a billion dollars in revenue seemed more satis-
fied with these measures of usability. This may be because these companies
are more likely to have the resources for extensive systems integration and
programming on an ongoing basis. Middle-market companies meanwhile have
a more constricted budget and must struggle with inadequacies where they
exist.
“The lower end of the middle market
company is underserved by IT.
They might not have very mature
business processes. They have
grown beyond Excel and do not
have the IT support to really achieve
digital transformation. They are too
large to rely on point solutions or
in-person communications, but lack
the budget and personnel of an
enterprise organization.”
North America, IFS

90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Less than $50
million
$50 million to
$100 million
$100 million to
$250 million
$250 million to
$500 million
$500 million to
$1 billion
More than $1
billion
Usability Improvement Areas by Revenue
More Consistent Better Integration Touch Screen/Tablets Real-Time KPIs Align with Business Faster Upgrade

KEY FINDING #5
Poor Usability May Be a Barrier to Servitization
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Field Service Aftermarket MRO Depot Repair Warranty
Digital Transformation Enables Servitization
Respondents who said their enterprise software did a poor job helping them
prepare for digital transformation, the Digital Transformation laggard, also
were less likely than Digital Transformation laggard to be engaged in service-
based business models. This result becomes even more significant when we
consider that 88 percent of Digital Transformation laggard reported being in
manufacturing-centric business models. With product-related revenue and
profit from manufacturing expected to languish in coming years, revenue
increases for many of these industrial companies will come from services.
These revenue sources are of critical importance to ensure growth, and
can also even out lumpy revenue typical in capital equipment or durable goods.
Manufacturers involved in aftermarket service are projecting faster growth
than those reliant entirely on product revenue. And this means companies
will need to ensure their enterprise software platform can be extended to
encompass business models including field service, depot repair, warranty
work, maintenance, repair and overhaul and other processes associated with
aftermarket service.
Discrete manufacturers, who are more likely to benefit from aftermarket
servitization opportunities than their process manufacturing counterparts, are
also more likely to be Digital Transformation laggards.
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Process Discrete
Digital Transformation by Manufacturing Type
“What this really indicates is that
respondents who have a clear
digital transformation strategy
are more adept at enabling new
business models. These business
models are logical extensions for
industrial companies looking for
new revenue models. Regardless
of the new business model you
want to explore, this DT strategy
will leave you better prepared than
competitors without a strong digital
transformation approach.”
North America, IFS

The single largest industry represented among respondents is industrial
machinery manufacturing, along with considerable percentages in industrial
controls, alternative energy equipment, aerospace and defense, automotive,
and other durable goods manufacturing industries. Each of these industries
does or will have compelling reasons to have a service organization involved
in multiple of these service-based disciplines. Lacking the ability to support
complex products after the sale, these companies may need to rely on dealer
or service organizations to support their products or simply be unable to offer
their customers lifecycle support for complex durable assets. This in turn may
put them at a disadvantage compared with more sophisticated manufacturing
organizations with the technological infrastructure to profitably manage the
mobile technicians, schedules, contracts, vendors and customer experience
around aftermarket service.
“Moving into different non-
manufacturing business models
can be a challenge for discrete
manufacturers. Service-oriented
disciplines like aftermarket field
service, warranty or advanced
supply chain or distribution models
or spare parts planning require
incredible digital visibility. At its
core, digital transformation enables
that digital visibility that may be
lacking in discrete manufacturing
in particular. In process industries
from chemicals to food and
beverage, operations have for
years been highly automated, from
mixing chemicals to baking bread.
By definition, they are already in
a highly digital world. In discrete
manufacturing, you have highly
automated machinery, but it is often
not united into a single digital view.”
North America, IFS

METHODOLOGY
IFS in North America and the research arm of CFE Media collected 200 survey
respondents from a sample of manufacturing, automation/controls and other
industrial executives. Data collection and tabulation were managed by Amanda
Pelliccione of CFE Media. IFS North America reviewed these tabulations and
cross-tabulations to draw inferences relevant to enterprise technology used
to manage industrial organizations involved in:
• Field service management
• Aftermarket service
• Maintenance repair and overhaul
• Depot repair
• Warranty/service work
• Manufacturing
• Construction
• Maintenance of their company’s physical assets

RESULTS
Disciplines Central to Business
Doing some Important Critical to business Will do in the future Not applicable/Don’t know
Field Service Management
Aftermarket Service
Maintenance Repair and Overhaul
Depot Repair
Warranty/Service Work
Manufacturing
Construction
Maintenance of your company’s physical assets
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Enterprise Software Ease of Use
Very Difficult
2%
Very Easy
14%
Somewhat Easy
60%
Difficult
24%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Action Taken When Enterprise Software is Difficult to Use
Definitely likely Definitely likely Unlikely Would never
Use a free, web-based tool instead
Use PC-based software instead
Engage with the system less or avoid
interacting with it
Speak up about usability issues
Just keep using it
Consider changing jobs
PC-Based Software System Alternatives
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Microsoft Excel
Corporate Email
Microsoft Project
Microsoft Access
Share point
Dropbox
Google Docs
Google Sites
Google Sheets
Google Cloud Connect
IBM Notes/Domino formerly Lotus Notes
Facebook Messenger
Yahoo Messenger
MSN Messenger
Other
None

Suggested Improvements to ERP, other Enterprise Software
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Suggested Improvements to ERP, other
Enterprise Software
Better integration between modules
Real-time graphic visualization of KPIs
More consistent functionality for one module to
the next
Better support for touch screens/tablets
Make it easier to align the software with our
business strategy
Easier/faster to upgrade
Other
How Well Enterprise Software Prepares for
Digital Transformation
It is an impediment
5%
Very well
13%
Somewhat well
49%
Not well
33%
Respondent Age
Prefer not to say
4%
18 to 35 years old
11%
36 to 45 years old
16%
46 to 55 years old
34%
56 years old or older
35%

Industry involvement
0% 10% 20% 30%
Industrial Machinery, Engine, Turbine,…
Industrial Controls, Test or Medical Equipment,…
Chemicals or Pharmaceuticals
Oil, Gas or petroleum Refining incl. Coal Products
Consumer Electronics or Appliances, Electrical…
Plastics or Rubber
Primary or Fabricated Metals
Alternative Energy Equipment, incl. Solar, Wind…
Food, Beverage or Tobacco
Utilities including Electric, Gas Water & Waste
Aircraft, Aerospace or Defense
Wood, Paper or Printing
Automotive or Transportation
Electrical Equipment or Appliances
Plant/Facilities Engineering or Maintenance…
Engineering or System Integration Services,…
Textiles or Apparel
Government or Military
Information, Data Processing or Software…
Mining, Agriculture or Construction
Other
Estimated Company Annual Revenue
Less than $50 million
30%
$50 million to $100 million
14%
$100 million to
$250 million
7%
$250 million to
$500 million
7%
$500 million to $1 billion
16%
More than $1 billion
18%
Don’t know
8%

En0364-1Production:IFSCorporateMarketing,October2017.
IFSworld.com
COPYRIGHT © 2017 INDUSTRIAL AND FINANCIAL SYSTEMS, IFS AB. IFS AND ALL IFS PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
NAMES ARE TRADEMARKS OF IFS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN STATEMENTS OF
POSSIBLE FUTURE FUNCTIONALITY FOR IFS’S PRODUCTS AND TECHNOLOGY. SUCH STATEMENTS ARE FOR
INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE INTERPRETED AS ANY COMMITMENT OR REPRESENTATION.
THE NAMES OF ACTUAL COMPANIES AND PRODUCTS MENTIONED HEREIN MAY BE THE TRADEMARKS OF THEIR
RESPECTIVE OWNERS.
IFS AB©2017
IFS is a globally recognized leader in developing and delivering
enterprise software for enterprise resource planning (ERP),
enterprise asset management (EAM) and enterprise service
management (ESM). Founded in 1983, IFS brings customers in
targeted sectors closer to their business, and helps them be
more agile and prepare for what’s next in their industry. IFS’s
3,300 employees support more than 1 million users worldwide
from its network of local offices and through a growing ecosystem
of partners.
For more information about IFS, visit IFSworld.com
AMERICAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +1 888 437 4968
ARGENTINA, BRAZIL, CANADA, ECUADOR, MEXICO, UNITED STATES
ASIA PACIFIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +65 63 33 33 00
AUSTRALIA, INDONESIA, JAPAN, MALAYSIA, NEW ZEALAND, PHILIPPINES,
PR CHINA, SINGAPORE, THAILAND
EUROPE EAST AND CENTRAL ASIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +48 22 577 45 00
BALKANS, CZECH REPUBLIC, GEORGIA, HUNGARY, ISRAEL, KAZAKHSTAN,
POLAND, RUSSIA AND CIS, SLOVAKIA, TURKEY, UKRAINE
EUROPE CENTRAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +49 9131 77 340
AUSTRIA, BELGIUM, GERMANY, ITALY, NETHERLANDS, SWITZERLAND
EUROPE WEST . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +44 1494 428 900
FRANCE, IRELAND, PORTUGAL, SPAIN, UNITED KINGDOM
MIDDLE EAST AND AFRICA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .+971 4390 0888
INDIA, SOUTH AFRICA, SRI LANKA, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES
SCANDINAVIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +46 13 460 4000
DENMARK, NORWAY, SWEDEN
FINLAND AND THE BALTIC AREA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +358 102 17 9300
ESTONIA, FINLAND, LATVIA, LITHUANIA
ABOUT IFS

Enterprise software usability and digital transformation

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (19)

Ähnlich wie Enterprise software usability and digital transformation

Ähnlich wie Enterprise software usability and digital transformation (20)

Mehr von Abhishek Sood

Mehr von Abhishek Sood (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Enterprise software usability and digital transformation