Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Select an e forms vendor


Published on

As the eForms market evolves, so do the features you need to evaluate. Pay close attention to rich UI, cloud vendors, and mobile functionality, as all three improve overall usability and decrease grief.

Use this Solution Set to:

•Understand what’s new in the eForms market.
•Evaluate eForms vendors and products for your enterprise needs.
•Determine which products are most appropriate for particular use cases and scenarios.
Ensure that you select the best eForms product for your enterprise needs.

Published in: Technology, Business

Select an e forms vendor

  1. 1. Select the Right eForms Solution<br />If process is a buster, eForms will automate.<br />
  2. 2. The eForms Vendor Landscape is a mix of new and established vendors addressing a field of different scenarios. Use cases will determine best fit.<br />Introduction<br />Enterprises seeking to select a solution for Forms Automation.<br />Their web conferencing use case may include:<br />Ad Hoc Form Automation<br />Departmental Process Support<br />Enterprise Mission Process Critical<br />Business Process Workflow Automation<br />This Research Is Designed For:<br />This Research Will Help You:<br />Understand what’s new in the eForms market.<br />Evaluate eForms vendors and products for your enterprise needs.<br />Determine which products are most appropriate for particular use cases and scenarios.<br />
  3. 3. Executive Summary<br />The eForms market is evolving away from the paper form entirely, replacing it with a rich UI and integration with both new digital media and more advanced mobile functionality.<br />Adobe LiveCycle and Acrobat, IBM Forms, and Autonomy LiquidOfficeeForms are all champions within the market space.<br />Once value for money is taken into consideration, Adobe Acrobat and PerfectForms become the most compelling options, though both lack the functionality for the most complex and advanced large enterprise use cases.<br />Each product evaluated has a different set of features designed to cater to different needs based on process criticality and use cases. Choose your solution based on the criticality of your process, your use case, your industry, and your mobile needs.<br />
  4. 4. Market Overview<br />How it got here<br />Where it’s going<br /><ul><li>Built-in Rich UI to optimize data input/output, improve user experience and decrease abandonment.
  5. 5. The emergence of digital media, e.g. new cameras and input methods, in personal devices is creating an increasingly digitized world, allowing more rich content to be built into forms.
  6. 6. Cloud-onlyvendors are appearing and allowing form data to be stored entirely in the cloud, without offering an on-premise solution at all.
  7. 7. Mobile form use, previously only enabling simple workflow participation (e.g. approvals) is expanding to more complex forms and tasks, and onto tablets for field operations, e.g. real estate, insurance, field sales.
  8. 8. Stemmed from early electronic facsimiles of standard business forms.
  9. 9. Initially forms could be downloaded, then routed to different steps.
  10. 10. Next, they could be completed entirely online but were still tied to the look and feel of the paper business form.
  11. 11. As electronic use and access increased, forms-driven business processes have evolved to become electronic only and never hit paper.
  12. 12. With more external stakeholders gaining electronic access, forms could exist entirely online and no longer be tied to a physical counterpart, i.e. the physical form metaphor is no longer a constraint. As a result, e-forms are employing more rich user interfaces.</li></ul>As the market evolves, so do the features you need to evaluate. Pay close attention to rich UI, cloud vendors, and mobile functionality, as all three improve overall usability and decrease grief.<br />
  13. 13. eForms Criteria & Weighting Factors<br />Product Evaluation<br />Features<br />Usability<br />The solution provides basic <br />and advanced feature/functionality.<br />Features<br />The five year TCO of the solution is economical.<br />Affordability<br />Affordability<br />Architecture<br />The solution’s dashboard and reporting tools are intuitive and easy to use.<br />Usability<br />Product<br />The delivery method of the solution aligns with what is expected within the space.<br />Architecture<br />Vendor Evaluation<br />Vendor<br />Vendor is profitable, knowledgeable, and will be around for the long-term.<br />Viability<br />Viability<br />Reach<br />Vendor is committed to the space and has a future product and portfolio roadmap.<br />Strategy<br />Vendor offers global coverage and is able to sell and provide post-sales support. <br />Reach<br />Channel<br />Vendor channel strategy is appropriate and the channels themselves are strong. <br />Channel<br />Strategy<br />
  14. 14. The Info-Tech eForms Landscape<br />Champions receive high scores for most evaluation criteria and offer excellent value. They have a strong market presence and are usually the trend setters for the industry. <br />Emerging Players are newer vendors who are starting to gain a foothold in the marketplace. They balance product and vendor attributes, though score lower relative to market Champions.<br />Innovators have demonstrated innovative product strengths that act as their competitive advantage in appealing to niche segments of the market. <br />Market Pillars are established players with very strong vendor credentials, but with more average product scores.<br />For a complete description of Info-Tech’s Vendor Landscape methodology, see the Appendix.<br />
  15. 15. Every vendor has its strengths & weaknesses;Pick the one that works best for you<br />Product<br />Vendor<br />Features<br />Usability<br />Affordability<br />Viability<br />Strategy<br />Channel<br />Reach<br />Architecture<br />Adobe LiveCycle<br />Adobe Acrobat<br />Autonomy Cardiff<br />IBM Lotus Forms<br />MS InfoPath <br />Form Services<br />MS InfoPath Client<br />PerfectForms<br />Formatta<br />LincDoc<br />Harvey Ball scores are indicative of absolute performance ratings but are not an exact correlation. Exceptional performance receives a full ball, poor performance an empty one, with a range in between.<br />
  16. 16. What is a Value Score?<br />Adobe Acrobat and PerfectForms provide the best bang-for-your-buck, but may not have all the features you need<br />On a relative basis, Adobe Acrobat maintained the highest Info-Tech Value Score of the vendor group. Vendors were indexed against Acrobat’s performance to provide a complete, relative view of their product offerings.<br />The Value Score indexes each vendor’s product offering and business strength relative to their price point. It does not indicate vendor ranking.<br />Vendors that score high offer more bang-for-the-buck (e.g. features, usability, stability, etc.) than the average vendor, while the inverse is true for those that score lower.<br /> <br />Price-conscious enterprises may wish to give the Value Score more consideration than those who are more focused on specific vendor/product attributes.<br />Sources:<br />To calculate the Value Score for each vendor, the affordability raw score was backed out, the product scoring reweighted, and the affordability score multiplied by the product of the Vendor and Product scores. <br />
  17. 17. Every vendor in the game has the basic table stakes, but who goes above and beyond in the areas that matter to you?<br />The Table Stakes<br />What Does This Mean?<br />Product supports its own signature system, a pubic certificate standard, or both.<br />Digital Signatures<br />The products assessed in this Vendor LandscapeTM meet, at the very least, the requirements outlined as Table Stakes. <br />Many of the vendors go above and beyond the outlined Table Stakes, some even do so in multiple categories. This section aims to highlight the products capabilities in excess of the criteria listed here. <br />Product allows users to create and design their own eForms. <br />Form Design<br />eForms can be pre-populated and integrate with data sources.<br />Data Integration & Pre-Population<br />Product provides a client for eForms users to fill out forms.<br />Form Fill<br />If Table Stakes are all you need from your eForms solution, the only true differentiator for the organization is price. Otherwise, dig deeper to find the best price to value for your needs.<br />
  18. 18. Table Stakes aside, vendors were evaluated on their individual advanced feature offering<br />What We Looked For<br />Features<br />Advanced features scoring methodology:<br />Self-Serve Design & Collect<br />eForms design and collection can be done with a rich UI and doesn’t require IT.<br />Info-Tech scored each vendor’s features offering as a summation of their individual scores across the listed advanced features. Vendors were given 1 point for each feature the product inherently provided. Some categories were scored on a more granular scale with vendors receiving half points (see Partial functionality criteria).<br />Archiving<br />Archive form submissions to PDF/A. Partial: Archive to an image archive format (e.g. TIFF)<br />Sample Forms<br />Provide sample business process forms to be customized.<br />State Transformation<br />Image capture through OCR/ICR, barcode generation. Partial: Through third party tool.<br />SharePoint Integration<br />Formal library services integration with MS SharePoint.<br />Create forms on the fly based on existing form components.<br />Dynamic Assembly<br />Rich UI<br />eForms themselves can be designed with a rich UI for enhanced user experience. <br />Industry Standard Support<br />Supports industry standards, e.g. ACORD, MISMO.<br />Data Analysis & Survey Function<br />Can capture survey data and multiple data sets may be output for analysis.<br />Workflow<br />Offers a rules and routing engine for eForms workflow.<br />Mobile<br />iOS, BlackBerry, and Android or Windows Phone 7. Partial: Any mobile client.<br />
  19. 19. LiveCycle<br />8,660<br />San Jose, CA<br /><br />1982<br />NASDAQ: ADBE<br />FY09 Revenue: $2.95B<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />Adobe LiveCycle is a best-of-breed product, but with a price point firmly outside entry level eForm needs<br />Champion<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>Adobe’s enterprise eForms and business process automation solution; a different product than Acrobat Forms.
  20. 20. Contrary to popular belief, LiveCycle offers full XML and HTML, not just PDF forms.
  21. 21. Adobe and partners are building out a library of vertical solutions, continuation of which will be critical to continue to compete with vertical ERP and ECM vendor forms solutions.
  22. 22. While its product offering is far above the standard offering in the landscape, so is its price point; LiveCycle is definitely not priced for enterprises with light eForms needs.
  23. 23. Comprehensive eForms management solution with data integration at every level.
  24. 24. Dynamic assembly lets you use form parts to build new forms on the fly and capture, OCR and 1D/2D bar code support.
  25. 25. Security & DigiSig available in LiveCycle portfolio as add-on.
  26. 26. Supports industry standards, e.g. ACORD, MISMO, PISCES</li></ul>Priced between $100,000 and $250,000<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />If you need a comprehensive and dynamic enterprise eForms solution for mission-critical form-based workflows, then Adobe LiveCycle is Info-Tech’s highest recommendation.<br />
  27. 27. Acrobat X Pro<br />9,117<br />San Jose, CA<br /><br />1982<br />NASDAQ: ADBE<br />FY10 Revenue: $3.8B<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />Adobe Acrobat makes up for average features and desktop architecture with strong usability and unbeatable value<br />Champion<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>Adobe’s comprehensive Windows and Mac desktop PDF client and small/mid-market eForms product offering.
  28. 28. No dynamic form assembly as with server products.
  29. 29. Self-signing e-approval, but can’t centrally manage signature files. Does support PKIs though.
  30. 30. Most users unaware of rich form UIs through Adobe Flash.
  31. 31. At US$449, its significantly cheaper than Adobe LiveCycle, but still offers strong features for light needs.
  32. 32. Form fill through a free, omnipresent Adobe Reader.
  33. 33. Comes with robust form designer.
  34. 34. Native SharePoint integration supports library services.</li></ul>Priced under $1,000<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />For those not looking for server-based workflow and dynamic assembly capabilities, Adobe Acrobat is an otherwise robust and hugely affordable eForms solution backed by a strong vendor.<br />
  35. 35. PerfectForms<br />50<br />Carlsbad, CA<br /><br />2001<br />Private<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />With an impressive and robust product, PerfectForms is the innovator in the eForms landscape<br />Innovator<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>Born as a survey and data analysis tool before adding more standard eForms, reporting capabilities, and workflow modules.
  36. 36. Cannot import forms, but can start with a form image.
  37. 37. Sales reach and support are not as strong as some of the bigger vendors in the landscape.
  38. 38. Very strong data analysis and survey functionality.
  39. 39. Can deploy through cloud, on-premise, or hybrid with the same codebase – rich browser-based UI.
  40. 40. Dynamic assembly for on-the-fly forms creation.
  41. 41. Cloud origin enables rapid growth of ecosystem of other cloud partners for value-added services like e-approvals.</li></ul>Priced under $1,000<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />Despite being a vendor underdog compared to the big market players, great usability, features and architecture make PerfectForms a cloud eForms innovator and a product worth evaluating.<br />
  42. 42. IBM Forms<br />426,751<br />Armonk, NY<br /><br />1911<br />NYSE: IBM<br />FY10 Revenue: $99.87B<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />IBM Forms is a giant step forward in IBM’s portfolio, though affordability remains focused on enterprise-level users<br />Champion<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>IBM’s best-of-breed strategic eForm solution, originally acquired from PureEdge.
  43. 43. Wizard-driven interface.
  44. 44. Multi-million dollar product roadmap.
  45. 45. No standalone form instance outside IBM’s XML technology.
  46. 46. Integration is primarily with other IBM products.
  47. 47. While positioning of IBM Forms vs. IBM FileNet Forms has improved in the last two years, the IBM portfolio still contains overlaps between Forms, FileNet, Lotus Notes/Domino, and Websphere, which can confuse eForm buyers.
  48. 48. Very strong support for industry standards, e.g. ACORD, MISMO.
  49. 49. Rich UI, can add documents, images, video, maps.
  50. 50. Strong XML, BPM, Process Server, and FileNet integration
  51. 51. iPad support.
  52. 52. Offers OCR/ICR capture capabilities.</li></ul>Priced between $100,000 and $250,000<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />For those in need of a robust solution and are okay with forms remaining entirely in IBM’s XML technology, IBM Forms is a very strong eForms product backed by a committed and strong vendor.<br />
  53. 53. Cardiff LiquidOffice<br />1,200 (Autonomy)<br />Cambridge, UK<br /><br />1996<br />LSE: AU<br />FY09 Revenue: $740M<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />Autonomy Cardiff LiquidOffice eForms is a leader in the eForms space targeted squarely to enterprise customers <br />Champion<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>Cardiff has historically focused on intelligent document products, baking rules and routing into content. Their eForm roots began with TeleForms, a paper form capture leader almost 2 decades ago, before acquisition by Autonomy.
  54. 54. Mobile client is for BlackBerry products only.
  55. 55. For smaller SMBs, Cardiff LiquidOffice may be prohibitively expensive.
  56. 56. Strong dynamic assembly, workflow, and BPM capabilities.
  57. 57. Supports capture through OCR, IRC,1D and 2D barcodes.
  58. 58. Part of a family of leading content-oriented products from a strong vendor in the information management market, Autonomy.</li></ul>Priced between $100,000 and $250,000<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />For more advanced dynamic assembly and capture needs, LiquidOffice eForms is a great choice. It can also handle more basic scenarios, but won’t provide the best value there. <br />
  59. 59. SharePoint 2010 Server Enterprise Ed. <br />89,000<br />Redmond, WA<br /><br />1975<br />MSFT<br />FY10 Revenue: $62.48B<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />MS InfoPath Form Services is stronger than InfoPath alone, but no free form-fill client is a problem<br />Emerging Player<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>Microsoft’s comprehensive server-based eForms and process automation solution that works with InfoPath client.
  60. 60. Part of the SharePoint Enterprise Edition, NOT Standard.
  61. 61. Works with other enterprise systems, not just InfoPath.
  62. 62. Form-fill client, InfoPath, isn’t free, limiting the scope of forms-based solutions, preventing it from seriously challenging Adobe LiveCycle.
  63. 63. Some advanced features are only available through partners, e.g. state transformation, support for industry standards.
  64. 64. Future roadmap and eForms commitment is uncertain.
  65. 65. Only fully SharePoint integrated forms solution.
  66. 66. Functionality & architecture is stronger than with Microsoft Info-Path only.
  67. 67. SharePoint-enabled workflow and dynamic form assembly.
  68. 68. It is fully integrated with Microsoft SharePoint library services.
  69. 69. Employs InfoPath’s strong XML-based format.</li></ul>Priced between $100,000 and $250,000<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />For SharePoint Server Enterprise Ed. users, SharePoint forms services offers strong integration and a robust architecture. Uncertain product strategy and price of InfoPath limit the value though.<br />
  70. 70. InfoPath<br />89,000<br />Redmond, WA<br /><br />1975<br />MSFT<br />FY10 Revenue: $62.48B<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />Microsoft InfoPath’s value proposition remains hampered by lack of a free form-filler<br />Emerging Player<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>Microsoft InfoPath is Microsoft’s desktop (client) eForms solution, without the server-based component of InfoPath Forms Services.
  71. 71. XML-based solution.
  72. 72. Microsoft’s continued refusal to create a free InfoPath filler has evolved from being costly to being downright annoying to customers. This prevents it from seriously challenging Adobe Acrobat for desktop eForms.
  73. 73. Future roadmap and Microsoft commitment to eForms is uncertain.
  74. 74. Very strong form design and authoring.
  75. 75. Member of MS Office family, meaning look & feel will be familiar to Office users.
  76. 76. Strong support for XML standards and arbitrary XML schemas.
  77. 77. Provides data analysis and survey capabilities.</li></ul>Priced between $100,000 and $250,000<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />While easy to use and great features, InfoPath remains an eForms gadfly without a free form-filler client.<br />
  78. 78. Formatta<br />50<br />Sulphur Springs, TX<br /><br />1997<br />Private<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />Formatta is worth a look for public sector, though likely lacks the functionality to make the grade for most others<br />Emerging Player<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>Owned by Access, which holds a portfolio of enterprise forms management products.
  79. 79. No dynamic assembly or state transformation.
  80. 80. No survey functionality and Formatta states that they are not a survey company.
  81. 81. Strong digital signature features, including X.509, remote signing, and LDAP.
  82. 82. Integration via XML, HTTP, SMTP, SQL and SOA.
  83. 83. Strong industry support, especially in education and public sector.
  84. 84. Web client for Apple iPad</li></ul>Priced information not available.<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />Formatta lacks the functionality and architecture to be a leader in the eForms space. That said, their parent company, Access is worth watching and offers impressive niche eForms solutions.<br />
  85. 85. LincDoc<br /><50<br />East Rochester, NY<br /><br />2007<br />Private<br />Product:<br />Employees:<br />Headquarters:<br />Website:<br />Founded:<br />Presence:<br />LincDoc is an emerging player to watch, though usability and features depend highly on what you’re looking for. <br />Emerging Player<br />Challenges<br />Overview<br />Strengths<br /><ul><li>Optional integration, digital signatures, components include data lookups and credit card processing.
  86. 86. More a multi-tenant architecture (cloud and on-premise) in progress right now than a fully-baked eForm solution.
  87. 87. MS Word/Adobe Acrobat-based form design and creation process is more difficult and unrefined than most form designers evaluated.
  88. 88. Workflow and case management, while available, is fairly light and not suitable for more enterprises with more robust needs.
  89. 89. Potential acquisition target.
  90. 90. LincDoc is LincWare’s first and only product to date.
  91. 91. Very strong tablet support (iPad and Android).
  92. 92. Forward thinking management team/company.
  93. 93. Competitive price point.
  94. 94. A vendor to watch.</li></ul>Priced between $25,000 and $50,000<br />Info-Tech Recommends:<br />When it comes to forward thinking functionality like mobile support and cloud ecosystems, LincDoc is a winner. However, clunky form creation and weak workflow hold it back.<br />
  95. 95. When it comes to eForms, price is directly linked to functionality for advanced use cases. If you don’t need it, don’t pay for it.<br />Select your product based on your use case; they aren’t interchangeable<br />1<br />Affordable Form Fill<br />Use Case<br />Workflow<br />2<br />Process Criticality<br />Form Services<br />LiveCycle<br />Acrobat<br />(Both)<br />(Both)<br />Data Analysis & Survey Function<br />3<br />Industry<br />State Transformation (Paper to/from Electronic)<br />4<br />Mobile <br />
  96. 96. Different enterprise problems are solved by different levels of form automation. Some solutions cater to lower levels, others to higher levels.<br />Select a product appropriate to the role forms play in your organization; there is no one size fits all<br />1<br />Ad Hoc Process Forms<br />Use Case<br />2<br />Process Criticality<br />Departmental Process Support<br />LiveCycle<br />Acrobat<br />(Both)<br />3<br />Industry<br />Forms Turbo<br />Mission Critical Process Support<br />4<br />Mobile <br />Forms<br />
  97. 97. If your industry requires adherence to particular standards, then standards support or industry-tailored solutions will be the backbone of your decision.<br />Some products cater to particular sensitive industries. Select accordingly.<br />1<br />Financial Services/Insurance<br />Use Case<br />Education<br />2<br />Process Criticality<br />LiveCycle<br />LiveCycle<br />LiveCycle<br />Healthcare<br />3<br />Industry<br />Government<br />4<br />Mobile <br />
  98. 98. Mobile is the future of eForms. While most vendors are expanding compatibility with each release, determine what your people need now.<br />If eForms will be utilized by a mobile workforce, select a product that supports your standard platform.<br />1<br />Apple iOS<br />Use Case<br />BlackBerry<br />2<br />Process Criticality<br />Form Services<br />Form Services<br />Form Services<br />Form Services<br />LiveCycle<br />LiveCycle<br />LiveCycle<br />LiveCycle<br />Windows Phone 7<br />3<br />Industry<br />Android<br />4<br />Mobile <br />
  99. 99. Appendix<br />
  100. 100. Methodology – Vendor Landscape & Harvey Balls<br />Info-Tech Research Group’s Vendor Landscape market evaluations are a part of a larger product selection solution set, referred to as a ‘Select Set.’<br />From the domain experience of our analysts, a vendor/product shortlist is established. Product briefings are requested from each of these vendors, asking for information on the company, products, technology, customers, partners, sales models and pricing.<br />Our analysts then score each vendor and product across a variety of categories, on a scale of 0-20 points. The raw scores for each vendor are then normalized to the other vendors’ scores to provide a sufficient degree of separation for a meaningful comparison. These scores are then weighted according to weighting factors that our analysts believe represent the weight that an average client should apply to each criteria. The weighted scores are then averaged for each of two high level categories: vendor score and product score. A plot of these two resulting scores is generated to place vendors in one of four categories: Champion, Innovator, Market Pillar, and Emerging Player.<br />For a more granular category by category comparison, analysts take the individual scores for each vendor/product in each evaluation category before they are normalized with the other vendor scores and convert those to a scale of zero to four whereby exceptional performance receives a score of four and poor performance receives a score of zero. These scores are represented with “Harvey Balls”, ranging from an open circle for a score of zero to a filled in circle for a score of four. Harvey Ball scores are indicative of absolute performance by category but are not an exact correlation to overall performance.<br />Individual scorecards are then sent to the vendors for factual review, and to ensure no information is under embargo. We will make corrections where factual errors exist (e.g. pricing, features, technical specifications). We will consider suggestions concerning benefits, functional quality, value, etc; however, these suggestions must be validated by feedback from our customers. We do not accept changes that are not corroborated by actual client experience or wording changes that are purely part of a vendor’s market messaging or positioning. Any resulting changes to final scores are then made as needed, before publishing the results to Info-Tech clients.<br />Vendor Landscapes are refreshed every 12 to 24 months, depending upon the dynamics of each individual market.<br />
  101. 101. Methodology – Value Index<br />Info-Tech Research Group’s Vendor Landscape market evaluations are a part of a larger product selection solution set, referred to as a ‘Select Set.’<br />The Value Index is an indexed ranking of value per dollar as determined by the raw scores given to each vendor by analysts. To perform the calculation, Affordability is removed from the Product score and the entire Product category is reweighted to represent the same proportions. The Product and Vendor scores are then summed, and multiplied by the Affordability raw score to come up with Value Score. Vendors are then indexed to the highest performing vendor by dividing their score into that of the highest scorer, resulting in an indexed ranking with a top score of 100assigned to the leading vendor.<br />The Value Index calculation is then repeated on the raw score of each category against Affordability, creating a series of indexes for Features, Usability, Viability, Strategy and Support, with each being indexed against the highest score in that category. The results for each vendor are displayed in tandem with the average score in each category to provide an idea of over and under performance. <br />The Value Index, where applicable, is refreshed every 12 to 24 months, depending upon the dynamics of each individual market.<br />