Key Findings

The expectations on software and software vendors are high

  • Over eight in ten (85%) say that software vendors need to constantly adapt to evolving market needs
  • 83% believe that software packaging must be flexible and 81% agree that software should be accessible across multiple devices

Most ISVs are currently experiencing software challenges

  • Around nine in ten ISV respondents admit that their organisation is experiencing challenges with their software licensing (91%) and their software packaging/bundling (88%)
  • 41% of ISV respondents report that their organisation finds it difficult to be flexible with their software licensing and has difficulty supporting their software on multiple devices

ISVs are concerned about non-compliance

  • Over four-fifths (84%) of ISV respondents worry that the software their organisation develops might become compromised
  • More worry about non-compliance now than they did in 2012 (73%)
  • Around half (48%) of enterprise respondents admit that their organisation has been non-compliant with at least one of their software licence agreements
  • Customers are more likely to be unwittingly non-compliant due to inadequate software licensing and entitlement management, than maliciously violating agreements

There are clear benefits of using a commercial solution rather than a home-grown licensing solution

  • ISVs that use an external licensing solution are more likely to have flexible packaging tools than those with a home-grown solution (49% vs. 35% respectively) and find it easier to support their software on multiple devices (61% vs. 58% respectively)
  • ISVs with a home-grown solution are almost twice as likely to find it very or extremely difficult to have visibility into how their products are being used (30% and 16% respectively)
Global

Software License Challenges

More than eight in ten respondents agree that software vendors need to constantly adapt to evolving market needs (85%) and software packaging must be flexible to meet a variety of customer needs (83%). Around four fifths also agree that software needs to be future proof to be successful (81%) and that software should be accessible across multiple devices (81%).

To what extent do you agree with the following statements?

To be successful, software needs to be future proof

Strongly disagree
1%
Disagree
5%
Neither agree or disagree
13%
Agree
44%
Strongly agree
37%

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

41% of ISV respondents agree that it is difficult to deploy their software on multiple devices and that they find it difficult to be flexible with their software licensing.

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (38%), entitlement generation, delivery and/or activation (35%), end-user provisioning (34%), and licensing on different devices (31%). Around nine in ten (91%) experience at least one licensing operations challenge.

More than four in five ISV respondents state licensing their organisation’s software solutions causes them frustration due to the cost of renewing and managing licences (87%), the time spent on renewing and managing licences (83%), and the integration effort of external licensing solutions (83%).

Around nine in ten (88%) ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are flexibility to bundle at the feature level (43%), the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (42%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (39%). One third (33%) say that the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 87% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are inflexible licence agreements (43%), slow on-boarding (38%) and lost licensing keys (35%).

Software monetization

Nine in ten (90%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Almost half (48%) report that their organisation uses software IP protection tools. Around four in ten (41%) use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools, with a third (33%) using software audit capabilities.

Almost three in five (57%) ISV respondents consider strong security features to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (44%) state flexible packaging/bundling functionality to be important, while 43% say the same about the cost of the solution.

UK

Software License Challenges

Around nine in ten (89%) respondents agree that software vendors need to constantly adapt to evolving market needs. Around four fifths also agree that software should be accessible across multiple devices (82%), that software packaging must be flexible to meet a variety of customer needs (78%) and that software needs to be future proof to be successful (78%).

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

53% of ISV respondents agree that it is difficult to deploy their software on multiple devices and around a quarter (27%) say that they find it difficult to be flexible with their software licensing.

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (50%), licensing on different devices (47%), application and/or feature-usage tracking and reporting (43%) and ongoing customer lifecycle management (37%). Nine in ten (90%) experience at least one licensing operations challenge.

Around three quarters (77%) of ISV respondents state licensing their organisation’s software solutions causes them frustration due to the cost of renewing and managing licences. Seven in ten report that the time spent on renewing and managing licences (70%) and the integration effort of external licensing solutions (70%) cause frustration.

Nine in ten (90%) ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (47%), flexibility to bundle at the feature level (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (37%).

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 88% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are inflexible licence agreements (52%), lost licensing keys (30%) and slow on boarding (28%).

Software monetization

Nine in ten (90%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Half (50%) report that their organisation use software IP protection tools. 47% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools, licence compliance enforcement mechanisms, customer usage data collection and reporting, and customer self-service tools.

Over half ISV respondents consider strong security features (57%) and flexible packaging/bundling functionality (53%) to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution.

FRANCE

Software License Challenges

Around eight in ten respondents agree that software should be accessible across multiple devices (78%) and that software packaging must be flexible to meet a variety of customer needs (78%). Three quarters also agree that software needs to be future proof to be successful (75%) and that software vendors need to constantly adapt to evolving market needs (75%).

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

53% of ISV respondents say that they find it difficult to be flexible with their software licensing and 37% agree that it is difficult to deploy their software on multiple devices.

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: entitlement generation, delivery, and/or activation (37%), end-user support (30%) and end-user provisioning (30%). All ISV respondents (100%) experience at least one licensing operations challenge.

The vast majority of ISV respondents state licensing their organisation’s software solutions causes them frustration due to the cost of renewing and managing licences (93%), the time spent on renewing and managing licences (87%), and the integration effort of external licensing solutions (83%).

All (100%) ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (53%), the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (37%) and flexibility to bundle at the feature level (33%). Three in ten (30%) say that the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 81% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are inflexible licence agreements (47%), slow on-boarding (35%) and lost licensing keys (22%).

Software monetization

All (100%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Half (50%) report that their organisation use software IP protection tools and 47% use licence compliance enforcement mechanisms. Almost two in five (37%) use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools.

Over half (53%) of ISV respondents consider strong security features to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. Almost half (47%) state automated license provisioning and enforcement to be important, while 40% say the same about flexible packaging/bundling functionality.

US

Software License Challenges

More than nine in ten respondents agree that software vendors need to constantly adapt to evolving market needs (95%) and software packaging must be flexible to meet a variety of customer needs (93%). The vast majority also agree that software should be accessible across multiple devices (91%) and that software needs to be future proof to be successful (89%).

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

40% of ISV respondents agree that it is difficult to deploy their software on multiple devices and the same number say that they find it difficult to be flexible with their software licensing.

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (40%), end-user provisioning (40%) and licensing on different devices (40%). The vast majority (95%) experience at least one licensing operations challenge.

Around nine in ten ISV respondents state licensing their organisation’s software solutions causes them frustration due to the integration effort of external licensing solutions (90%), the cost of renewing and managing licences (88%) and the time spent on renewing and managing licences (87%).

The majority (88%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are flexibility to bundle at the feature level (50%), the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (48%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (37%).

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 91% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are lost licensing keys (47%), slow on-boarding (42%), usage audits (40%) and inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs (37%).

Software monetization

Nine in ten (95%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Around half (52%) report that their organisation uses flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and software IP protection tools (48%).

Around two thirds (67%) of ISV respondents consider strong security features to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. Half (50%) state flexible packaging/bundling functionality to be important, while 48% say the same about automated licence provisioning and enforcement.

DACH

Software License Challenges

Around nine in ten respondents agree that software needs to be future proof to be successful (91%), software vendors need to constantly adapt to evolving market needs (89%), software packaging must be flexible to meet a variety of customer needs (88%) and that software should be accessible across multiple devices (87%).

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

Half (50%) of ISV respondents say that they find it difficult to be flexible with their software licensing and 47% agree that it is difficult to deploy their software on multiple devices.

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: entitlement generation, delivery and/or activation (57%), end-user provisioning (40%) and end user support (33%). All (100%) experience at least one licensing operations challenge.

Around nine in ten ISV respondents state licensing their organisation’s software solutions causes them frustration due to the cost of renewing and managing licences (93%), the time spent on renewing and managing licences (87%), and the integration effort of external licensing solutions (87%).

All (100%) ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are flexibility to bundle at the feature level (60%), the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (50%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (43%). Close to three in ten (27%) say that the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 82% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are inflexible licence agreements (50%), slow on-boarding (44%) and usage audits (36%).

Software monetization

All (100%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Six in ten (60%) report that their organisation use software IP protection tools. Half (50%) use software audit capabilities, with 40% that use licence compliance enforcement mechanisms. Only 30% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools.

Almost three in five (57%) ISV respondents consider strong security features to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. Close to half (47%) state automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important, while 43% say the same about the flexible packaging/bundling functionality. Only 23% believe that the cost of the solution is important criteria when evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution.

Japan

Software License Challenges

Around seven in ten (68%) respondents agree that software vendors need to constantly adapt to evolving market needs and 65% agree that software packaging must be flexible to meet a variety of customer needs. The same figure (65%) also agree that software needs to be future proof and 60% agree that software should be accessible across multiple devices.

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

37% of ISV respondents agree that they find it difficult to be flexible with their software licensing and around a quarter (27%) admit that it is difficult to support their software on multiple devices.

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (37%), ongoing customer lifecycle management (27%) and end-user provisioning (23%). Around two thirds (67%) experience at least one licence operations challenge.

Over four in five (83%) ISV respondents state licensing their organisation’s software solutions causes them frustration due to the time spent on renewing and managing licences, research and development time spent on non-product related development, and the cost spent on non-product related development.

Almost two thirds (63%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (30%). Around a quarter say that the flexibility to bundle at the feature level (23%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (23%) is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 89% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are usage audits (39%), lost licensing keys (38%) and slow on-boarding (36%). Around a third (35%) also find inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs a challenge.

Software monetization

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Three in ten report that their organisation use software IP protection tools (30%) and software audit capabilities (30%). 27% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and/or licence compliance enforcement mechanisms.

Almost half (47%) of ISV respondents consider the cost of a solution to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (43%) state strong security features are important, and 33% say that automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important. Flexible packaging/bundling functionality is important according to 30% of ISV respondents.

Financial Services

Software License Challenges

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (37%), ongoing customer lifecycle management (27%) and end-user provisioning (23%). Around two thirds (67%) experience at least one licence operations challenge.

Almost two thirds (63%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (30%). Around a quarter say that the flexibility to bundle at the feature level (23%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (23%) is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 89% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are usage audits (39%), lost licensing keys (38%) and slow on-boarding (36%). Around a third (35%) also find inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs a challenge.

Software monetization

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Three in ten report that their organisation use software IP protection tools (30%) and software audit capabilities (30%). 27% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and/or licence compliance enforcement mechanisms.

Almost half (47%) of ISV respondents consider the cost of a solution to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (43%) state strong security features are important, and 33% say that automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important. Flexible packaging/bundling functionality is important according to 30% of ISV respondents.

Manufacturing

Software License Challenges

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (37%), ongoing customer lifecycle management (27%) and end-user provisioning (23%). Around two thirds (67%) experience at least one licence operations challenge.

Almost two thirds (63%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (30%). Around a quarter say that the flexibility to bundle at the feature level (23%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (23%) is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 89% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are usage audits (39%), lost licensing keys (38%) and slow on-boarding (36%). Around a third (35%) also find inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs a challenge.

Software monetization

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Three in ten report that their organisation use software IP protection tools (30%) and software audit capabilities (30%). 27% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and/or licence compliance enforcement mechanisms.

Almost half (47%) of ISV respondents consider the cost of a solution to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (43%) state strong security features are important, and 33% say that automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important. Flexible packaging/bundling functionality is important according to 30% of ISV respondents.

Medical

Software License Challenges

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (37%), ongoing customer lifecycle management (27%) and end-user provisioning (23%). Around two thirds (67%) experience at least one licence operations challenge.

Almost two thirds (63%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (30%). Around a quarter say that the flexibility to bundle at the feature level (23%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (23%) is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 89% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are usage audits (39%), lost licensing keys (38%) and slow on-boarding (36%). Around a third (35%) also find inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs a challenge.

Software monetization

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Three in ten report that their organisation use software IP protection tools (30%) and software audit capabilities (30%). 27% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and/or licence compliance enforcement mechanisms.

Almost half (47%) of ISV respondents consider the cost of a solution to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (43%) state strong security features are important, and 33% say that automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important. Flexible packaging/bundling functionality is important according to 30% of ISV respondents.

Media and Broadcasting

Software License Challenges

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (37%), ongoing customer lifecycle management (27%) and end-user provisioning (23%). Around two thirds (67%) experience at least one licence operations challenge.

Almost two thirds (63%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (30%). Around a quarter say that the flexibility to bundle at the feature level (23%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (23%) is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 89% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are usage audits (39%), lost licensing keys (38%) and slow on-boarding (36%). Around a third (35%) also find inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs a challenge.

Software monetization

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Three in ten report that their organisation use software IP protection tools (30%) and software audit capabilities (30%). 27% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and/or licence compliance enforcement mechanisms.

Almost half (47%) of ISV respondents consider the cost of a solution to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (43%) state strong security features are important, and 33% say that automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important. Flexible packaging/bundling functionality is important according to 30% of ISV respondents.

Utilities

Software License Challenges

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (37%), ongoing customer lifecycle management (27%) and end-user provisioning (23%). Around two thirds (67%) experience at least one licence operations challenge.

Almost two thirds (63%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (30%). Around a quarter say that the flexibility to bundle at the feature level (23%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (23%) is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 89% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are usage audits (39%), lost licensing keys (38%) and slow on-boarding (36%). Around a third (35%) also find inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs a challenge.

Software monetization

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Three in ten report that their organisation use software IP protection tools (30%) and software audit capabilities (30%). 27% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and/or licence compliance enforcement mechanisms.

Almost half (47%) of ISV respondents consider the cost of a solution to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (43%) state strong security features are important, and 33% say that automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important. Flexible packaging/bundling functionality is important according to 30% of ISV respondents.

Construction

Software License Challenges

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (37%), ongoing customer lifecycle management (27%) and end-user provisioning (23%). Around two thirds (67%) experience at least one licence operations challenge.

Almost two thirds (63%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (30%). Around a quarter say that the flexibility to bundle at the feature level (23%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (23%) is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 89% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are usage audits (39%), lost licensing keys (38%) and slow on-boarding (36%). Around a third (35%) also find inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs a challenge.

Software monetization

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Three in ten report that their organisation use software IP protection tools (30%) and software audit capabilities (30%). 27% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and/or licence compliance enforcement mechanisms.

Almost half (47%) of ISV respondents consider the cost of a solution to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (43%) state strong security features are important, and 33% say that automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important. Flexible packaging/bundling functionality is important according to 30% of ISV respondents.

Telecommunications

Software License Challenges

ISV challenges with existing SM solutions

ISV respondents are most likely to report the following licensing operation challenges being experienced by their existing operations tools: end user support (37%), ongoing customer lifecycle management (27%) and end-user provisioning (23%). Around two thirds (67%) experience at least one licence operations challenge.

Almost two thirds (63%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation experiences product packaging/bundling challenges. Top challenges reported are the ability to support licence models customers are demanding (40%) and the ability to adapt to marketing demands in a timely manner (30%). Around a quarter say that the flexibility to bundle at the feature level (23%) and the ability to re-package offerings without engineering involvement (23%) is a challenge.

Challenges passed to enterprises

According to 89% of enterprise respondents, their organisation experiences at least one challenge when it comes to software licences. Some of the most likely challenges are usage audits (39%), lost licensing keys (38%) and slow on-boarding (36%). Around a third (35%) also find inflexible licence agreements that do not meet business needs a challenge.

Software monetization

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation uses at least one software monetization method to ensure the security, flexibility, and profitability of their offerings. Three in ten report that their organisation use software IP protection tools (30%) and software audit capabilities (30%). 27% use flexible feature packaging/bundling tools and/or licence compliance enforcement mechanisms.

Almost half (47%) of ISV respondents consider the cost of a solution to be an important criteria for evaluating a licensing/software monetization solution. More than two in five (43%) state strong security features are important, and 33% say that automated licence provisioning and enforcement is important. Flexible packaging/bundling functionality is important according to 30% of ISV respondents.

Global

The Business Impact

Around two thirds (68%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

More than four in five (84%) ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from 74% in 2012.

ISVs see an impact on their bottom line from intellectual property theft (59%), limited flexibility of licensing models (53%), lost revenue due to customers knowingly violating licensing agreements (56%) and lost revenue due to customers unwittingly violating licensing agreements (54%).

Enterprise non-compliance

Around half (48%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 8% of respondents who are not sure if they have been. In 2012, only a quarter (25%) of respondents had been non-compliant.

Around three quarters (73%) of enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 22% of software unlicensed on average.

UK

The Business Impact

Almost three in five (57%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (77%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from 70% in 2012.

ISVs see an impact on their bottom line from intellectual property theft (50%), limited flexibility of licensing models (37%), lost revenue due to customers knowingly violating licensing agreements (33%) and lost revenue due to customers unwittingly violating licensing agreements (33%).

Enterprise non-compliance

Around two in five (39%) enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 12% of respondents who are not sure if they have been. In 2012, only a fifth (20%) of respondents’ organisations had been non-compliant.

Around three quarters (76%) of enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 20% of software unlicensed on average.

France

The Business Impact

Nine in ten (90%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

The vast majority (87%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised.

ISVs see an impact on their bottom line from lost revenue due to customers knowingly violating licensing agreements (67%), intellectual property theft (63%), limited flexibility of licensing models (60%), and lost revenue due to customers unwittingly violating licensing agreements (57%).

Enterprise non-compliance

Almost two fifths (36%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 10% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Around three quarters (74%) of enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 28% of software unlicensed on average.

US

The Business Impact

Three in five (67%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

More than four fifths (83%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from 74% in 2012.

ISVs see an impact on their bottom line from lost revenue due to customers unwittingly violating licensing agreements (57%), limited flexibility of licensing models (57%), lost revenue due to customers knowingly violating licensing agreements (55%) and intellectual property theft (53%).

Enterprise non-compliance

Most (59%) enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 5% of respondents who are not sure if they have been. In 2012, only around a quarter (26%) of respondents had been non-compliant.

Around four in five (82%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 32% of software unlicensed on average.

DACH

The Business Impact

Around two thirds (67%) of ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

All (100%) ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from 83% in 2012.

ISVs see an impact on their bottom line from lost revenue due to customers knowingly violating licensing agreements (90%), competitors stealing intellectual property (80%), and lost revenue due to customers unwittingly violating licensing agreements (73%).

Enterprise non-compliance

A quarter (25%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 15% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Over half (54%) of enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 11% of software unlicensed on average.

Japan

The Business Impact

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (73%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from only 8% in 2012.

ISVs see an impact on their bottom line from intellectual property theft (53%), lost revenue due to customers unwittingly violating licensing agreements (50%) and limited flexibility of licensing models (43%).

Enterprise non-compliance

Around seven in ten (68%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 4% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Most (71%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 9% of software unlicensed on average.

Financial Services

The Business Impact

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (73%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from only 8% in 2012.

Enterprise non-compliance

Around seven in ten (68%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 4% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Most (71%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 9% of software unlicensed on average.

Manufacturing

The Business Impact

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (73%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from only 8% in 2012.

Enterprise non-compliance

Around seven in ten (68%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 4% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Most (71%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 9% of software unlicensed on average.

Medical

The Business Impact

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (73%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from only 8% in 2012.

Enterprise non-compliance

Around seven in ten (68%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 4% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Most (71%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 9% of software unlicensed on average.

Media and Broadcasting

The Business Impact

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (73%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from only 8% in 2012.

Enterprise non-compliance

Around seven in ten (68%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 4% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Most (71%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 9% of software unlicensed on average.

Utilities

The Business Impact

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (73%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from only 8% in 2012.

Enterprise non-compliance

Around seven in ten (68%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 4% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Most (71%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 9% of software unlicensed on average.

Construction

The Business Impact

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (73%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from only 8% in 2012.

Enterprise non-compliance

Around seven in ten (68%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 4% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Most (71%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 9% of software unlicensed on average.

Telecommunications

The Business Impact

Six in ten (60%) ISV respondents say that their organisation finds it difficult to have visibility into how their product(s) is/are being used (i.e. what is being used, by whom, to what extent, and when).

Around three quarters (73%) of ISV respondents worry that software developed by their organisation might become compromised, up from only 8% in 2012.

Enterprise non-compliance

Around seven in ten (68%) of enterprise respondents’ organisations have been non-compliant with one or more of their software licence agreements with a further 4% of respondents who are not sure if they have been.

Most (71%) enterprise respondents say that their organisation had at least some unlicensed software in the last year, with 9% of software unlicensed on average.

Global

Improvements are needed

The majority of enterprise respondents agree that their current software provider could improve their service in the following ways: clarity when it comes to processes/audits (80%), usage tracking/auditing (72%), flexible pricing models (71%) and licence enablement (60%).

More than half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (60%) and being cost effective (55%). Around half state that the software being easily integrated with existing systems (51%) and ensuring that the software can be used and accessed on every relevant device by every user (50%) are also important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Over five in ten (56%) ISV respondents say that their organisation is currently delivering their software offering electronically. Around half (52%) currently also deliver on disk and are installed by customers on their own hardware.

60% of enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 39% in 2012.

UK

Improvements are needed

The majority of enterprise respondents agree that their current software provider could improve their service in the following ways: clarity when it comes to flexible pricing models (85%), processes/audits (76%), usage tracking/auditing (74%) and licence enablement (59%).

More than half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are being cost effective (58%), ensuring that the software can be used and accessed on every relevant device by every user (56%), that the software is easily integrated with existing systems (54%) and flexible deployment options (52%).

Are ISVs behind the times?

Seven in ten (70%) ISV respondents say that their organisation is currently delivering their software offering electronically. Two in five (40%) currently deliver on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware.

65% of enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 33% in 2012.

France

Improvements are needed

The majority of enterprise respondents agree that their current software provider could improve their service in the following ways: clarity when it comes to processes/audits (72%), flexible pricing models (72%), licence enablement (61%) and usage tracking/auditing (59%).

Around two-thirds of enterprise respondents say that the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (67%) and cost effectiveness (66%). Ensuring that the software can be used and accessed on every relevant device by every user (57%) and that the software is easily integrated with existing systems (45%) are also important for many.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Almost six in ten (57%) ISV respondents say that their organisation currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 47% currently deliver electronically.

49% of enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery.

US

Improvements are needed

The majority of enterprise respondents agree that their current software provider could improve their service in the following ways: clarity when it comes to processes/audits (93%), usage tracking/auditing (83%), flexible pricing models (76%) and licence enablement (72%).

Around three in five enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (63%) and being cost effective (60%). Around half (48%) state that the software being easily integrated with existing systems is important and 43% report the same for ensuring that the software can be used and accessed on every relevant device by every user.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Most (58%) ISV respondents say that their organisation is currently delivering their software offering electronically. Half (50%) currently deliver on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware.

68% of enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 44% in 2012.

DACH

Improvements are needed

The majority of enterprise respondents agree that their current software provider could improve their service in the following ways: flexible pricing models (82%), clarity when it comes to processes/audits (75%), usage tracking/auditing (73%) and licence enablement (65%).

More than six in ten enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are the software being easily integrated with existing systems (65%), flexible deployment options (64%) and ensuring that software can be used and accessed on every relevant device by every user (63%). Just over half (54%) state that the software being cost effective is also important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

63% of ISV respondents currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 60% deliver their software electronically.

Around half (51%) of enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery.

Japan

Improvements are needed

The majority of enterprise respondents agree that their current software provider could improve their service in the following ways: clarity when it comes to processes/audits (73%) and usage tracking/auditing (61%). Over three in ten would like to see improvements made to flexible pricing models (38%) and licence enablement (31%).

Around half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (53%) and having software that is easily integrated into existing systems (49%). 45% also state that ongoing support is important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Half (50%) of ISV respondents’ organisations currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 40% currently deliver their software offering electronically.

Most (62%) enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 42% in 2012.

Financial Services

Improvements are needed

Around half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (53%) and having software that is easily integrated into existing systems (49%). 45% also state that ongoing support is important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Half (50%) of ISV respondents’ organisations currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 40% currently deliver their software offering electronically.

Most (62%) enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 42% in 2012.

Manufacturing

Improvements are needed

Around half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (53%) and having software that is easily integrated into existing systems (49%). 45% also state that ongoing support is important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Half (50%) of ISV respondents’ organisations currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 40% currently deliver their software offering electronically.

Most (62%) enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 42% in 2012.

Medical

Improvements are needed

Around half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (53%) and having software that is easily integrated into existing systems (49%). 45% also state that ongoing support is important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Half (50%) of ISV respondents’ organisations currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 40% currently deliver their software offering electronically.

Most (62%) enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 42% in 2012.

Media and Broadcasting

Improvements are needed

Around half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (53%) and having software that is easily integrated into existing systems (49%). 45% also state that ongoing support is important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Half (50%) of ISV respondents’ organisations currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 40% currently deliver their software offering electronically.

Most (62%) enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 42% in 2012.

Utilities

Improvements are needed

Around half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (53%) and having software that is easily integrated into existing systems (49%). 45% also state that ongoing support is important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Half (50%) of ISV respondents’ organisations currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 40% currently deliver their software offering electronically.

Most (62%) enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 42% in 2012.

Construction

Improvements are needed

Around half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (53%) and having software that is easily integrated into existing systems (49%). 45% also state that ongoing support is important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Half (50%) of ISV respondents’ organisations currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 40% currently deliver their software offering electronically.

Most (62%) enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 42% in 2012.

Telecommunications

Improvements are needed

Around half of enterprise respondents say that some of the most important attributes when acquiring software for their organisation are flexible deployment options (53%) and having software that is easily integrated into existing systems (49%). 45% also state that ongoing support is important.

Are ISVs behind the times?

Half (50%) of ISV respondents’ organisations currently deliver their software offering on disk which is then installed by customers on their own hardware, while 40% currently deliver their software offering electronically.

Most (62%) enterprise respondents report that their preferred method to receive software from a vendor is by electronic delivery, up from 42% in 2012.

Global

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (49%) than those with a home-grown solution (35%).

Furthermore, those from software vendors with a home-grown solution are more likely to say that they find it difficult to have visibility into how their products are used (30%).

Software vendors also worry more that their software will become compromised (41%).

The potential costs (53%) or the time it takes to implement a solution (52%) are/were the top concerns with deciding to use a commercial solution. For two-fifths (40%), the loss of control is/was a concern.

According to 65% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution, it would take six months to incorporate a third party solution, on average.

Two-thirds (66%) with a commercial solution report that it did take an average of six months to migrate. Only 2% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

Only 7% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. Most (67%) say that it was not at all or only somewhat difficult.

UK

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (67%) than those with a home-grown solution (38%).

The potential costs (77%) or the time it takes to implement a solution (60%) are/were the top concerns with deciding to use a commercial solution. For just under half (47%), the loss of control is/was a concern.

According to 54% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution, it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution.

Two-thirds (67%) with a commercial solution report that it did take up to six months to migrate. No respondents (0%) state that it did take longer than 12 months.

Only 8% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. Most (75%) say that it was not at all or only somewhat difficult.

France

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (46%) than those with a home-grown solution (27%).

The potential costs (50%), the time it takes to implement a solution (43%) and the loss of control (43%) are/were the top concerns with deciding to use a commercial solution.

According to 87% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution, it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution.

Around seven in ten (69%) with a commercial solution report that it did take up to six months to migrate. No respondents (0%) state that it would, or it did, take longer than 12 months.

Only 8% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. Most (54%) say that it was not at all or only somewhat difficult.

US

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (50%) than those with a home-grown solution (43%).

The potential costs (57%) or the time it takes to implement a solution (57%) are/were the top concerns with deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost two-fifths (37%), the loss of control is/was a concern.

According to 79% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution, it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution.

Around two-thirds (67%) with a commercial solution report that it did take up to six months to migrate. Only 5% say it did take longer than 12 months.

Only 7% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. Most (74%) say that it was not at all or only somewhat difficult.

DACH

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (42%) than those with a home-grown solution (18%).

The time it takes to implement a solution (57%) is/was the most common concern for ISV respondents when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost half, the loss of control (47%) and difficulty with resolving technical issues (47%) is/was a concern.

According to 59% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution, it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution.

Over eight in ten (83%) with a commercial solution report that it did take up to six months to migrate. 0% of respondents said it would, or it did, take longer than 12 months.

Only 8% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. Most (67%) say that it was only somewhat difficult.

Japan

Benefits of a commercial solution

Difficulty resolving technical issues (43%) and complexities with the migration (40%) are/were the top concerns when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost four in ten the potential costs (37%) and the time it takes to fully implement a solution (37%) are/were concerns.

Only 29% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution believe it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution. On average, respondents think it would take 8 months.

On average, respondents who organisation has a commercial solution report that it did take 8 months to migrate. 0% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

No ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. For almost one in five (17%), it was only somewhat difficult.

Financial Services

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (67%) than those with a home-grown solution (38%).

Difficulty resolving technical issues (43%) and complexities with the migration (40%) are/were the top concerns when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost four in ten the potential costs (37%) and the time it takes to fully implement a solution (37%) are/were concerns.

Only 29% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution believe it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution. On average, respondents think it would take 8 months.

On average, respondents who organisation has a commercial solution report that it did take 8 months to migrate. 0% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

No ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. For almost one in five (17%), it was only somewhat difficult.

Manufacturing

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (67%) than those with a home-grown solution (38%).

Difficulty resolving technical issues (43%) and complexities with the migration (40%) are/were the top concerns when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost four in ten the potential costs (37%) and the time it takes to fully implement a solution (37%) are/were concerns.

Only 29% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution believe it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution. On average, respondents think it would take 8 months.

On average, respondents who organisation has a commercial solution report that it did take 8 months to migrate. 0% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

No ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. For almost one in five (17%), it was only somewhat difficult.

Medical

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (67%) than those with a home-grown solution (38%).

Difficulty resolving technical issues (43%) and complexities with the migration (40%) are/were the top concerns when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost four in ten the potential costs (37%) and the time it takes to fully implement a solution (37%) are/were concerns.

Only 29% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution believe it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution. On average, respondents think it would take 8 months.

On average, respondents who organisation has a commercial solution report that it did take 8 months to migrate. 0% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

No ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. For almost one in five (17%), it was only somewhat difficult.

Media and Broadcasting

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (67%) than those with a home-grown solution (38%).

Difficulty resolving technical issues (43%) and complexities with the migration (40%) are/were the top concerns when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost four in ten the potential costs (37%) and the time it takes to fully implement a solution (37%) are/were concerns.

Only 29% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution believe it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution. On average, respondents think it would take 8 months.

On average, respondents who organisation has a commercial solution report that it did take 8 months to migrate. 0% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

No ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. For almost one in five (17%), it was only somewhat difficult.

Utilities

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (67%) than those with a home-grown solution (38%).

Difficulty resolving technical issues (43%) and complexities with the migration (40%) are/were the top concerns when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost four in ten the potential costs (37%) and the time it takes to fully implement a solution (37%) are/were concerns.

Only 29% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution believe it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution. On average, respondents think it would take 8 months.

On average, respondents who organisation has a commercial solution report that it did take 8 months to migrate. 0% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

No ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. For almost one in five (17%), it was only somewhat difficult.

Construction

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (67%) than those with a home-grown solution (38%).

Difficulty resolving technical issues (43%) and complexities with the migration (40%) are/were the top concerns when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost four in ten the potential costs (37%) and the time it takes to fully implement a solution (37%) are/were concerns.

Only 29% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution believe it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution. On average, respondents think it would take 8 months.

On average, respondents who organisation has a commercial solution report that it did take 8 months to migrate. 0% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

No ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. For almost one in five (17%), it was only somewhat difficult.

Telecommunications

Benefits of a commercial solution

There are numerous benefits to using a third party licensing solution rather than a home-grown approach. ISV respondents from organisations with a commercial software licensing solution are more likely to have flexible bundling tools (67%) than those with a home-grown solution (38%).

Difficulty resolving technical issues (43%) and complexities with the migration (40%) are/were the top concerns when deciding to use a commercial solution. For almost four in ten the potential costs (37%) and the time it takes to fully implement a solution (37%) are/were concerns.

Only 29% of ISV respondents whose organisation is using a home-grown licensing solution believe it would take up to six months to incorporate a third party solution. On average, respondents think it would take 8 months.

On average, respondents who organisation has a commercial solution report that it did take 8 months to migrate. 0% think it would, or say it did, take longer than 12 months.

No ISV respondents whose organisation is using a commercial licensing solution report that it was extremely difficult to migrate. For almost one in five (17%), it was only somewhat difficult.

Global

Internet of Things

Seven in ten respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, the same number (70%) agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around one in five (21%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Around three in ten (30%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 64% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than four in five (85%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (93%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. Around half (48%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 31% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (24%) or lack of technical expertise (25%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (23%) is holding their organisation back. Only 18% say that there is no business case and only the minority (13%) claim that they do not understand the benefits.

Around four fifths (91%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (46%) or by providing support with data protection and security (44%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (38%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (35%) or supporting with IP protection (26%).

UK

Internet of Things

Nearly seven in ten (69%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, a similar number (65%) agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around one in five (19%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Nearly a quarter (23%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 51% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. Nearly four in five (78%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, nine in ten (90%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. Around half (49%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 35% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (14%) or lack of technical expertise (28%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (19%) is holding their organisation back. Only 20% say that there is no business case and only the minority (15%) claim that they do not understand the benefits.

Around four fifths (89%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than half believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (52%) or by providing support with data protection and security (45%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (41%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (37%) or supporting with IP protection (19%).

France

Internet of Things

More than five in ten (51%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, 70% agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around one in ten (12%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Around four in ten (42%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 35% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than nine in ten (98%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, nearly nine in ten (88%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. More than two fifths (46%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 19% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (32%) or lack of technical expertise (31%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (32%) is holding their organisation back. Only 17% say that there is no business case and only the minority (7%) claim that they do not understand the benefits.

More than four fifths (95%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (48%) or by providing support with data protection and security (45%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (37%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (43%) or supporting with IP protection (32%).

US

Internet of Things

More than seven in ten (75%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, a similar number (78%) agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Almost a quarter (24%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Nearly three in ten (29%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and half are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than nine in ten (92%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (97%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. More than half (51%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 34% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (24%) or lack of technical expertise (18%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (17%) is holding their organisation back. Only 19% say that there is no business case and only the minority (10%) claim that they do not understand the benefits.

More than nine in ten (95%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than half (56%) believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics or by providing support with data protection and security (48%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (45%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (35%) or supporting with IP protection (29%).

DACH

Internet of Things

More than seven in ten (75%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, 84% agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around one in five (21%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Almost two fifths (37%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 89% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. The majority are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (93%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. Nearly two thirds (63%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 35% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (25%) or lack of technical expertise (25%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (27%) is holding their organisation back. Only 18% say that there is no business case and only the minority (17%) claim that they do not understand the benefits.

More than nine in ten (95%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two fifths (45%) believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics or by providing support with data protection and security (50%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (40%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (38%) or supporting with IP protection (28%).

Japan

Internet of Things

Seven in ten respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, 41% agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around a quarter (25%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. More than one in ten (16%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 45% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than seven in ten (73%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (94%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. Around a quarter (26%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 29% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (04%) or lack of technical expertise (28%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (22%) is holding their organisation back. Only 17% say that there is no business case and 22% claim that they do not understand the benefits.

Nearly four fifths (78%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (22%) or by providing support with data protection and security (25%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (22%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (24%) or supporting with IP protection (20%).

Financial Services

Internet of Things

Seven in ten respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, the same number (71%) agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

More than one in ten (16%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Around a quarter (25%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 43% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than four in five (84%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (93%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. Around half (48%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 31% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (24%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (23%) is holding their organisation back. Only 18% say that there is no business case and only the minority (13%) claim that they do not understand the benefits (13%).

Around four fifths (81%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (46%) or by providing support with data protection and security (44%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (38%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (35%) or supporting with IP protection (26%).

Manufacturing

Internet of Things

More than three quarters (76%) of respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, 61% agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around one in ten (15%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Around a third (33%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 39% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than three quarters (76%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (98%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. Around two fifths (43%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 37% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (22%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (26%) is holding their organisation back. Only 18% say that there is no business case and 19% claim that they do not understand the benefits.

Around nine in ten (91%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. Almost half believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (48%) or by providing support with data protection and security (45%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (42%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (41%) or supporting with IP protection (27%).

Medical

Internet of Things

More than six in ten (62%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, the more than three quaraters (76%) agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around one in five (21%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Nearly three in ten (28%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 37% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than four in five (86%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, nine in ten (90%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. More than half (52%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 27% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Three in ten say a lack of vendor support (30%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (19%) is holding their organisation back. Only 21% say that there is no business case and only the minority (12%) claim that they do not understand the benefits.

Around nine in ten (93%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (33%) or by providing support with data protection and security (53%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (45%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (40%) or supporting with IP protection (30%).

Media and Broadcasting

Internet of Things

Nearly six in ten (%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, more than seven in ten 73% agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around three in ten (31%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Around four in ten (44%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 16% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than nine in ten (91%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than eight in ten (83%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. Around two fifths (40%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 21% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. More than a quarter say a lack of vendor support (27%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (27%) is holding their organisation back. Only 15% say that there is no business case and only the minority (8%) claim that they do not understand the benefits.

Around four fifths (81%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (49%) or by providing support with data protection and security (41%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (40%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (37%) or supporting with IP protection (34%).

Utilities

Internet of Things

More than seven in ten (74%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, two fifths (81%) agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

More than a quarter (26%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Around three in ten (17%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 45% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. Nearly nine in ten (88%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (97%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. More than half (52%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 34% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (24%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (20%) is holding their organisation back. Only 11% say that there is no business case and only the minority (4%) claim that they do not understand the benefits.

Nearly nine in ten (88%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than three in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (61%) or by providing support with data protection and security (40%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (31%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (31%) or supporting with IP protection (21%).

Construction

Internet of Things

More than seven in ten (78%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, nearly half (59%) agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around one in ten (9%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Nearly four in ten (37%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 35% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. More than four in five (81%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (93%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. Around half (48%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 31% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (24%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (23%) is holding their organisation back. Only 18% say that there is no business case and only the minority (13%) claim that they do not understand the benefits (13%).

More than four fifths (85%) of respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (42%) or by providing support with data protection and security (44%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (40%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (29%) or supporting with IP protection (31%).

Telecommunications

Internet of Things

Nearly six in ten (59%) respondents agree that there is a lack of clarity about how organisations can monetize the Internet of Things.

However, nearly three quarters (74%) respondents agree that the Internet of Things could provide their organisation with new monetization opportunities.

Around a third (33%) respondents say that their organisation is already exploring how to further monetize from the Internet of Things. Around three in ten (29%) claim that their organisation is planning to explore within the next 12 months and 27% are planning to do so in the next 1-5 years. Nearly nine in ten (89%) are already exploring or plan to do so in the next 5 years.

Of respondents whose organisations are not already exploring how to monetize from the Internet of Things, more than nine in ten (96%) state there is at least one reason preventing their organisation from exploring sooner. More than half (54%) report that security concerns are preventing their organisation, with 33% who say that their organisation has higher priorities. Around a quarter say a lack of vendor support (24%) or the fact that they don’t believe the technology is ready yet (21%) is holding their organisation back. Around a quarter (25%) say that there is no business case and only the minority (9%) claim that they do not understand the benefits).

More than nine in ten (95%) respondents report that there is at least one way which third parties could help their organisation to monetize the Internet of Things. More than two in five believe third parties could help with data collection and analytics (43%) or by providing support with data protection and security (37%). Other areas third parties could help are with consulting services (30%), helping to better connect with the IoT economy (37%) or supporting with IP protection (29%).

Demographics

Gemalto commissioned Vanson Bourne to interview a total of 780 decision makers. As part of the research there were two distinct respondent types: respondents from independent software vendors (ISVs) and respondents from enterprises. The former are business decision makers from organisations with 10 or more employees and the latter are IT decision makers from organisations with 500 or more employees.

Most decision makers were interviewed using an online methodology with 168 that participated via telephone interviewing. The majority of telephone interviews were conducted with ISV respondents. Respondents came from five countries/regions around the world:

ISV Respondents

ISV respondants
  • US - 33.3%
  • UK - 16.6%
  • France - 16.6%
  • Dach - 16.6%
  • Japan - 16.6%

Enterprise Respondents

ISV respondants
  • US - 33.3%
  • UK - 16.6%
  • France - 16.6%
  • Dach - 16.6%
  • Japan - 16.6%
Global
UK
France
US
DACH
Japan
global
uk
france
us
dach
japan
Financial Services
Manufacturing
Medical
Media and Broadcasting
Utilities
Construction
Telecommunications
financialservices
manufacturing
medical
mediaandbroadcasting
utilities
construction
telecommunications
Filter by
Industry
Filter by
Country