Saturday, July 31, 2010

EAM versus CMMS: What's Right for Your Company? Part Three: Analysis of IFS and Intentia

Whether due to the same geographic origin or not, one can notice many similarities between Intentia (XSSE: INT B) and IFS AB (XSSE: IFS), in addition to a few differences. Having both been Swedish companies, both exude the domain expert knowledge within the industries of their focus, and both vendors have been congenial and disinclined to exaggerate their capabilities. On the down side, however, these traits are drawbacks in other more flamboyant, marketing-rich markets outside Scandinavia, particularly in the United States, where these vendors occasionally have been regarded as somewhat unexciting or reserved.

Having traditionally done implementations via their product delivery organization, IFS and Intentia have also long exhibited a focus on product quality and customer satisfaction that manifests into a lasting relationship with each client. Both IFS and Intentia boast long lists of delighted customer references as a display of their high level of confidence in their successful implementations and subsequent after-sales life cycle and upgrades.

While with the exception of some regional pockets, many may not have necessarily heard of Intentia's or IFS's good reputations outside Europe. Nonetheless the vendors have impressive backgrounds. Founded in 1984 and now Scandinavia's largest software company, Intentia is established in some forty countries with nearly 3,000 employees and 3,500 customers worldwide. Intentia's annual net revenues for 2003 were $363 million (USD), based on the average exchange rates for the period. IFS was founded a year earlier, in 1983, and it currently has a global presence serving forty-five countries with over 2,600 employees and 2,500 customers worldwide. Its annual net revenue for 2003 was $290 million (in USD), based on the average exchange rates for the period. However, based on the currency exchange rate (which is how revenue is typically reported making it more comparable with previous years results), the vendor reported $323 million (USD).

As for the industry focus, Intentia is a major player in selected industry verticals such as food and beverage; fashion; automotive; paper; steel; maintenance; service and repair; and wholesale and distribution. In addition to these, the 2004 focus for its EAM solution will include power generation; primary chemicals; third party outsourced maintenance providers; metals processing; ports; and airports. On its hand, IFS targets automotive suppliers; aviation and defense (A&D); energy and utilities; high-tech, industrial manufacturers (general engineer-to-order [ETO]/make-to-order [MTO] manufacturers); infrastructure and facilities management; batch process industries; rail and transit; and telecommunications. The common thread throughout these is complex, multisite engineering and manufacturing, bundled with a specialization in the more asset-intensive industries, particularly for the maintenance repair operating supplies (MRO) services management.

However, after a strong performance throughout the 1990's, both vendors suffered a sudden stall in total revenues growth upon entering into the new century (see figures 1 and 3). This was due, in part, to the soft market after the Y2K over-hyped phenomenon and followed by the global economic downturn. This brings us to some differences between the two vendors. For example, Intentia had an IBM-based platform centric approach in its Movex software until 1999, when it released a multi-platform version of Movex which was written in Java and included an optional web interface. For more detail, see our article Intentia's Movex for Food and Beverage: Gaining a Foothold in North America. Also, Intentia remains the larger and possibly a functionally better vendor of the two (in terms of multinational financials/consolidation, budgeting, HR/payroll, distribution/transportation, marketing campaigns, and other capabilities). However, at the same time, it is somewhat stodgier and only recently started to open up to the concept of selling into multi-vendor environments.


SOURCE:http://www.technologyevaluation.com/research/articles/eam-versus-cmms-what-s-right-for-your-company-part-three-analysis-of-ifs-and-intentia-17213/

No comments:

Post a Comment