Executive Summary Data Orchestration While data-driven enterprises stand to gain a competitive advantage by responding faster to worker and customer demands for more innovative, data-rich applications and personalized experiences, this increasingly relies on a complex array of data pipelines to support agile, continuous data processing. Given the increasing complexity of evolving data sources and requirements, it is essential to automate and coordinate the creation, scheduling and monitoring of data pipelines as part of a DataOps approach to data management. This is the realm of data orchestration, which ISG Research defines as providing the capabilities to automate and accelerate the flow of data to support operational and analytics initiatives and drive business value via capabilities for the monitoring and management of data pipelines and associated workflow. At the highest level of abstraction, data orchestration covers data collection, data transformation, and data activation. At the highest level of abstraction, data orchestration covers three key capabilities: data collection, including data ingestion, preparation and cleansing; data transformation, additionally including integration and enrichment; and data activation, making the results available to compute engines, analytics and data science tools, or operational applications. This may sound very much like the tasks that data management practitioners have undertaken for decades. As such, it is fair to ask what separates data orchestration from traditional approaches to data management. Viewing data management challenges through the lens of today’s data-processing requirements is key to understanding why data orchestration is a necessary and differentiated approach that goes beyond traditional data management. Being data-driven requires a combination of people, processes, information and technology improvements involving data culture, data literacy, data democracy and data curiosity. Encouraging workers to discover and experiment with data is a key aspect of being data-driven that requires new, agile approaches to data management. Additionally, the increasing reliance on real-time data processing is driving requirements for more agile, continuous data processing. The rapid adoption of cloud computing has fragmented where data is generated and stored. Enterprise data is increasingly spread across multiple data centers and cloud providers. Traditional approaches to data management are rooted in point-to-point batch data processing, whereby data is extracted from its source, transformed for a specific purpose and loaded into a target environment for analysis. These approaches are unsuitable for the demands of modern analytics environments, which instead require agile data pipelines that can traverse multiple data-processing locations and evolve in response to changing data sources and business requirements. Given the increasing complexity of evolving data sources and requirements, there is a need to enable the flow of data across an enterprise through new approaches to the creation, scheduling, automation and monitoring of workflows. Traditionally, individual tasks related to these requirements have been addressed with a variety of specialist tools as well as manual effort, hand-coded scripts and expertise. Data orchestration tools are designed to automate and coordinate the sequential or parallel execution of a complete set of tasks via data pipelines. In comparison, data orchestration tools are designed to automate and coordinate the sequential or parallel execution of a complete set of tasks via data pipelines, typically based on directed acyclic graphs that represent the relationships and dependencies between the tasks. The capabilities delivered by data orchestration fall under three categories: pipeline monitoring, pipeline management and workflow management. As is often the case with new approaches to data and analytics, the requirements for data orchestration were first experienced by digital-native brands at the forefront of data-driven business strategies. One of the most prominent data orchestration tools, Apache Airflow, began as an internal development project within Airbnb, becoming an Apache Software Foundation project in 2016. Workflow automation platform Flyte was created and subsequently open-sourced by Lyft, and Metaflow was developed and open-sourced by Netflix. Data orchestration is not just for digital natives, however, and a variety of software providers have sprung up with offerings based around these open-source projects, as well as other development initiatives, to bring the benefits of data orchestration to the masses. In addition to stand-alone data orchestration software products and cloud services, data orchestration capabilities are also being built into larger data-engineering platforms addressing broader data management requirements, including data observability, often in the context of data fabric and data mesh. Whether stand-alone or embedded in larger data-engineering platforms, data orchestration has the potential to drive improved efficiency and agility in data and analytics projects. ISG asserts that by 2027, more than one-half of enterprises will adopt data orchestration technologies to automate and coordinate data workflows and increase efficiency and agility in data and analytics projects. Adoption of data orchestration is still in the early stages and is closely linked to larger data transformation efforts that introduce greater agility and flexibility. Adoption of data orchestration is still in the early stages and is closely linked to larger data transformation efforts that introduce greater agility and flexibility. If an enterprise’s data processes and skills remain rooted in traditional products and manual intervention, then data orchestration is not likely to be a quick fix. However, alongside the cultural and organizational changes involved in people, processes and information improvements, data orchestration has the potential to play a key role in the technological improvement involved in becoming more data-driven. All enterprises are recommended to explore how the orchestration of data pipelines can help increase the potential for improved data-driven decision-making as part of a broader evaluation of the people, processes, information and technology improvements required to deliver data-driven decision-making. The orchestration of data pipelines is just one aspect of improving the use of data within an enterprise. In addition to the development, testing and deployment of data pipelines, DataOps also encompasses data observability, which has a complementary role to play in monitoring the health of data pipelines and associated workflows as well as the quality of the data itself. The combination of healthy and well-orchestrated data pipelines and data observability is also complementary to developing and delivering data products, ensuring that data consumers can trust the provenance and quality of the data that is made available across the enterprise. Data orchestration is also integral to the development and delivery of applications driven by artificial intelligence and generative AI, complementing MLOps, which serves the collection of artifacts and orchestration of processes necessary to deploy and maintain AI/ML models. Specifically, data orchestration can be used to automate and accelerate the flow of data from multiple sources, including existing applications and data platforms as well as the output of large language models and vector databases. Almost one-half (49%) of participants in ISG’s 2023 Application Development and Maintenance Study expect to AI-enable applications by embedding AI and ML models into current applications and processes. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Data Orchestration evaluates software providers and products in key areas, including data pipeline management, workflow management and pipeline deployment. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products to address key elements of data orchestration as we define it: Alteryx, Amazon Web Services, Astronomer, BMC, Cloudera, Dagster Labs, Databricks, DataKitchen, DataOps.live, dbt Labs, Google, Hitachi, IBM, Informatica, Infoworks, K2View, Keboola, Matillion, Microsoft, Nexla, Prefect, Rivery, Saagie, SAP, Stonebranch, Y42 and Zoho. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Data Orchestration is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for data orchestration software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for data orchestration to an enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of data orchestration technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of data orchestration software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating data orchestration systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds Databricks atop the list, followed by Microsoft and Alteryx. Providers that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. Informatica has done so in five categories; Microsoft and SAP in three; AWS, Databricks and Google in two; and Alteryx, Astronomer, BMC, Keboola and Stonebranch in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: Alteryx, AWS, BMC, Databricks, DataOps.live, Google, IBM, Informatica, Matillion, Microsoft and SAP. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. The providers rated Innovative are: Astronomer, Cloudera, and Keboola. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. The providers rated Assurance are: Hitachi, Rivery and Zoho. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Dagster Labs, DataKitchen, dbt Labs, Infoworks, K2view, Nexla, Prefect, Saagie, Stonebranch and Y42. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle data orchestration, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (10%), Capability (25%), Reliability (15%), Adaptability (15%) and Manageability (15%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Microsoft, Databricks and Google were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are Databricks, Microsoft and SAP. These category leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. While not Leaders, Informatica and BMC were also found to meet a broad range of enterprise customer experience requirements. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for Data Orchestration in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $10 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide support on at least two continents and have at least 50 workers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the past 18 months. The software provider must provide a product or products that support agile and collaborative data operations and marketed as addressing at least one of the following functional areas, which are mapped into the Buyers Guide capability criteria: pipeline management, workflow management and pipeline monitoring. Data orchestration enables the flow of data across the organization via capabilities for pipeline monitoring, pipeline management and workflow management. Given the increasing complexity of evolving data sources and requirements, it’s essential to automate and coordinate the creation, scheduling and monitoring of data pipelines. To be included in this Buyers Guide requires functionality that addresses the following sections of the capabilities document: Pipeline management Workflow management Pipeline monitoring The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant data orchestration products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year Alteryx Analytics Cloud N/A October 2024 Astronomer Astro N/A October 2024 AWS Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow N/A September 2024 BMC Control-M 9.0.21.300 October 2024 Cloudera Data Platform - Data Engineering 1.22.0-h1 August 2024 Dagster Labs Dagster+ 1.8.12 October 2024 Databricks Data Intelligence Platform N/A October 2024 DataKitchen DataOps Automation 1.2.9 February 2024 DataOps.live DataOps.live October 2024 October 2024 dbt Labs dbt October 2024 October 2024 Google Cloud Data Fusion Cloud Dataflow N/A N/A October 2024 September 2024 Hitachi Pentaho Data Integration 10.2 September 2024 IBM Cloud Pak for Data 5.0 September 2024 Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud October 2024 October 2024 Infoworks Infoworks 6.1.0 September 2024 K2view Data Product Platform 8.1.1 October 2024 Keboola Keboola N/A November 2024 Matillion Data Productivity Cloud N/A October 2024 Microsoft Fabric October 2024 October 2024 Nexla Nexla N/A October 2024 Prefect Prefect Cloud 3.0 September 2024 Rivery Rivery October 2024 October 2024 Saagie Saagie September 2024 September 2024 SAP Data Intelligence Cloud Datasphere N/A 2024.20 April 2024 September 2024 Stonebranch Universal Automation Center 7.7.0.0 October 2024 Y42 Y42 N/A July 2024 Zoho DataPrep 2.0 October 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Annual Revenue >$10M Operates on 2 Continents At Least 50 Employees GA Product/ Documentation Ascend Data Automation Cloud No Yes No Yes Datacoves Datacoves No Yes No Yes Datafold Datafold No Yes No Yes Kestra Kestra Enterprise No Yes No Yes Orchestra Technologies Orchestra No Yes No Yes Promethium Promethium No Yes No Yes PurpleCube AI PurpleCube AI No Yes No Yes Saturam Qualdo, Piperr No Yes Yes No Switchboard Software Data Automation No Yes No Yes Torana iceDQ No Yes Yes No
Executive Summary DataOps As enterprises embracing artificial intelligence move from initial pilots and trial projects through deployment and into production at scale, many are realizing the critical importance of agile and responsive data processes. These processes are often combined with tools and platforms that facilitate data management to improve trust in the data used for AI and analytics. This has led to increased attention on the role of data operations, which ISG Research defines as the application of agile development, DevOps and lean manufacturing by data engineering professionals in support of data production. It encompasses the development, testing, deployment and orchestration of data integration and processing pipelines, along with improved data quality and validity via data monitoring and observability. DataOps has been part of the lexicon of the data market for almost a decade. It takes inspiration from DevOps, which describes a set of tools, practices and a philosophy used to support the continuous delivery of software applications in the face of constant change. An emphasis on agility, collaboration and automation separates DataOps from traditional approaches to data management. Interest in DataOps is growing. ISG Research asserts that through 2026, more than one-half of enterprises will adopt agile and collaborative DataOps practices to facilitate responsiveness, avoid repetitive tasks and deliver measurable data reliability improvements. A variety of products, practices and processes enable DataOps, including products that support agile and continuous delivery of data analytics and AI and continuous, measurable improvement. An emphasis on agility, collaboration and automation separates DataOps from traditional approaches to data management, which typically included batch-based, manual and rigid tools and practices. However, this distinction between DataOps and traditional data management tools is clearer in theory than in practice. Providers of traditional data management have, in recent years, incorporated capabilities that make products more automated, collaborative and agile. There is no industry-wide consensus on the level of agility, collaboration and automation that must be provided for products to be considered part of the DataOps category. This has led to some traditional data management providers adopting a broader definition of DataOps that describes the combination of people, processes and technology needed to automate the delivery of data to users in an enterprise and enable collaboration to facilitate data-driven decisions. This definition is broad enough that it could be interpreted to encompass all products and services that address data management and data governance, including many traditional batch-based, manual products that do not support agile and continuous delivery and continuous, measurable improvement. The narrow definition of DataOps provides a set of criteria for agile and collaborative practices that products and services can be measured against. A narrower definition of DataOps focuses on the practical application of agile development, DevOps and lean manufacturing to the tasks and skills employed by data engineering professionals in support of data analytics development and operations. This definition emphasizes specific capabilities such as continuous delivery of analytic insight, process simplification, code generation, automation to avoid repeated errors and reduced repetitive tasks, the incorporation of stakeholder feedback and advancement and measurable improvement in the efficient generation of insight from data. As such, the narrow definition of DataOps provides a set of criteria for agile and collaborative practices that products and services can be measured against. ISG Research’s perspective, based on our interaction with the software provider and user communities, aligns with the narrow definition. While traditional data management and data governance are complementary, our DataOps coverage focuses specifically on the delivery of agile business intelligence and AI through the automation and orchestration of data processing pipelines, incorporating improved data reliability and integrity via data monitoring and observability. To be more specific, we believe that DataOps products and services provide the following functionality: agile and collaborative data operations; the development, testing and deployment of data and analytics pipelines; data orchestration; data observability; and the delivery of data products. These are the key criteria we used to assess DataOps products and services as part of this Buyer’s Guide. This research is comprised of parallel evaluations of products addressing each of the four core areas of functionality: data pipelines, data orchestration, data observability and data products. Additionally, we evaluated all products in all categories in relation to their support for agile and collaborative practices. The development, testing and deployment of data pipelines is a fundamental accelerator of data-driven strategies, enabling enterprises to extract data generated by operational applications used to run the business and transport it into the analytic data platforms used to analyze operations. ISG Research defines data pipelines as the systems used to transport, process and deliver data produced by operational data platforms and applications into analytic data platforms and applications for consumption. Healthy data pipelines are necessary to ensure data is ingested, processed and loaded in the sequence required to generate BI and AI. Healthy data pipelines are necessary to ensure data is ingested, processed and loaded in the sequence required to generate BI and AI. Given the increasing complexity of evolving data sources and requirements, it is essential to automate and coordinate the creation, scheduling and monitoring of data pipelines as part of a DataOps approach to data management. This is the realm of data orchestration, which ISG Research defines as providing the capabilities to automate and accelerate the flow of data to support operational and analytics initiatives and drive business value via capabilities for the monitoring and management of data pipelines and associated workflow. By 2027, more than one-half of enterprises will adopt data orchestration technologies to automate and coordinate data workflows and increase efficiency and agility in data and analytics projects. Maintaining data quality and trust is a perennial data management challenge, often preventing enterprises from operating at the speed of business. In addition to automating and coordinating the creation, scheduling and monitoring of data pipelines via data orchestration, it is also critical to monitor the quality and reliability of the data flowing through those data pipelines. This is achieved using data observability, which ISG Research defines as providing the capabilities for monitoring the quality and reliability of data used for analytics and governance projects as well as the reliability and health of the overall data environment. The metrics generated by data observability also form a critical component of the development and sharing of data products, providing the information by which data consumers can gauge if a data product meets their requirements in terms of a variety of attributes including validity, uniqueness, timeliness, consistency, completeness and accuracy. ISG Research defines data products as the outcome of data initiatives developed with product thinking and delivered as reusable assets that can be discovered and consumed by others on a self-service basis, along with associated data contracts and feedback options. Key capabilities for platforms that enable the development of data products include a dedicated interface for the development and classification of data products and data contracts as well as a dedicated interface for the self-service discovery and consumption of data products and data contracts. Data product platforms should also include the ability for consumers of data products to provide feedback, comments and ratings as well as request improvements or new products, and the ability for data owners to monitor data product usage and performance metrics and view and manage requests for data product modifications and the development of new data products. As always, however, software products are only one aspect of delivering on the promise of DataOps. New approaches to people, processes and information are also required to deliver agile and collaborative development, testing and deployment of data and analytics workloads, as well as data operations. To improve the value generated from analytics and data initiatives, enterprises need to adopt processes and methodologies that support rapid innovation and experimentation, automation, collaboration, measurement and monitoring, and high data quality. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for DataOps evaluates software providers and products to address data pipeline development, testing and deployment, data pipeline orchestration, data pipeline observability, and data products. Providers with products that address at least two elements—data pipelines, data orchestration or data observability—were deemed to provide a superset of functionality to address DataOps overall. This approach is designed to maintain consistency with the 2023 DataOps Buyers Guide and reflects the relative immaturity of data product platforms. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products to address key elements of DataOps as we define it: Alteryx, AWS, Astronomer, BMC, Dagster Labs, Databricks, DataKitchen, DataOps.live, dbt Labs, Google, Hitachi, IBM, Informatica, Infoworks, K2View, Keboola, Matillion, Microsoft, Nexla, Prefect, Qlik, Rivery, SAP, Y42 and Zoho. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for DataOps is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for DataOps software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for DataOps to an enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of DataOps technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of DataOps software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating DataOps systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds Informatica atop the list, followed by Microsoft and IBM. Providers that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. Informatica has done so in five categories; Databricks and Microsoft in three; Google and SAP in two; and Alteryx, AWS, DataOps.live, IBM, Keboola and Qlik in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: Alteryx, AWS, Databricks, Google, IBM, Informatica, Matillion, Microsoft, Qlik and SAP. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. The providers rated Innovative are: DataOps.live, K2View and Keboola. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. The providers rated Assurance are: BMC, Hitachi and Rivery. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Astronomer, Dagster Labs, DataKitchen, dbt Labs, Infoworks, Nexla, Prefect, Y42 and Zoho. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle DataOps, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (15%), Capability (20%), Reliability (15%), Adaptability (15%) and Manageability (15%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Informatica, Microsoft and IBM were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investment in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are Databricks, Microsoft and SAP. These category leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. While not Leaders, Informatica and BMC were also found to meet a broad range of enterprise customer experience requirements. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for DataOps in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $10 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide support on at least two continents, and have at least 50 employees. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the past 12 months. The software provider must provide a product or products that supports agile and collaborative data operations and marketed as addressing at least one of the following functional areas, which are mapped into Buyers Guide capability criteria: a DataOps tool or platform, a data pipeline development, deployment and testing tool or platform, a data orchestration tool or platform, a data observability tool or platform, or a data products tool or platform. The Data Operations Buyers Guide consists of five parallel evaluations focused on data pipelines, data orchestration, data observability and data products as well as an overall evaluation related to data operations. Data Operations focuses on the application of agile development, DevOps and lean manufacturing by data engineering professionals in support of data production. It encompasses the development, testing, deployment and orchestration of data integration and processing pipelines, along with improved data quality and validity via data monitoring and observability, and the development and consumption of data products. To be included in this Buyers Guide requires functionality that addresses the following sections of the capabilities document: Agile and collaborative data operations practices At least two of Data pipelines Data orchestration Data observability This approach is designed to maintain consistency with the 2023 DataOps Buyers Guide and reflects the relative immaturity of data product platforms. The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant DataOps products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year Alteryx Analytics Cloud, Connect N/A 2024.2 October 2024 October 2024 Astronomer Astro N/A October 2024 AWS AWS Glue, Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow, Amazon DataZone N/A N/A N/A September 2024 September 2024 September 2024 BMC Control-M 9.0.21.300 October 2024 Dagster Labs Dagster+ 1.8.12 October 2024 Databricks Data Intelligence Platform N/A October 2024 DataKitchen DataOps TestGen, DataOps Automation, DataOps Observability 2.15.3 1.2.9 2.2.1 October 2024 February 2024 August 2024 DataOps.live DataOps.live October 2024 October 2024 dbt Labs dbt October 2024 October 2024 Google Cloud Data Fusion, Cloud Dataflow N/A N/A October 2024 September 2024 Hitachi Pentaho Data Integration 10.2 September 2024 IBM Cloud Pak for DataData Observability by Databand 5.0 N/A September 2024 September 2024 Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud October 2024 October 2024 Infoworks Infoworks 6.1.0 September 2024 K2view Data Product Platform 8.1.1 October 2024 Keboola Keboola N/A November 2024 Matillion Data Productivity Cloud N/A October 2024 Microsoft Fabric Purview October 2024 October 2024 October 2024 October 2024 Nexla Nexla N/A October 2024 Prefect Prefect Cloud 3.0 September 2024 Qlik Talend Cloud, Talend Cloud Data Inventory N/A R2024-09 October 2024 September 2024 Rivery Rivery October 2024 October 2024 SAP Data Intelligence Cloud, Datasphere N/A 2024.20 April 2024 September 2024 Y42 Y42 N/A July 2024 Zoho DataPrep 2.0 October 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Annual Revenue >$10M Operates on 2 Continents At Least 50 Employees GA Product/ Documentation Ascend Data Automation Cloud No Yes No Yes RightData DataFactory, DataTrust, DataMarket Yes Yes Yes No Saturam Qualdo, Piperr No Yes Yes No
Executive Summary Data Observability Maintaining data quality and trust is a perennial data management challenge, often preventing enterprises from operating at the speed of business. In addition to automating and coordinating the creation, scheduling and monitoring of data pipelines via data orchestration, it is also critical to monitor the quality and reliability of the data flowing through those data pipelines. This is achieved using data observability, which ISG Research defines as providing the capabilities for monitoring the quality and reliability of data used for analytics and governance projects as well as the reliability and health of the overall data environment. A baseline requirement for data observability software is that it collects and measures metrics from data pipelines, data warehouses, data lakes and other data-processing platforms. There has been a Cambrian explosion of data observability software providers in recent years, inspired by the observability platforms that provide an environment for monitoring metrics, traces and logs to track application and infrastructure performance. To monitor and measure anything, it must first be instrumented, so a baseline requirement for data observability software is that it collects and measures metrics from data pipelines, data warehouses, data lakes and other data-processing platforms. Data observability software also collects, monitors and measures information on data lineage (dependencies between data), metadata (describing the attributes of the data, such as its age, volume, format and schema) and logs of human- or machine-based interaction with the data. In addition to collecting and monitoring this information, some data observability software also enables the creation of models that can be applied to the various metrics, logs, dependencies and attributes to automate the detection of anomalies. Data observability software may also offer root cause analysis and the provision of alerts, explanations and recommendations to enable data engineers and data architects to accelerate the correction of issues, as well as take preemptive action to prevent data quality issues from reoccurring. The metrics generated by data observability also form a critical component of the development and sharing of data products, providing the information by which data consumers can gauge if a data product meets their requirements in terms of a variety of attributes, including validity, uniqueness, timeliness, consistency, completeness and accuracy. As enterprises aspire to be more data-driven, it is critical to trust the data used to make those decisions. The importance of trust in data has arguably never been greater. As enterprises aspire to be more data-driven, it is critical to trust the data used to make those decisions. However, only 1 in 5 (20%) participants in ISG’s Analytics and Data Benchmark Research are very confident in the ability to analyze the quantity of data needed to make informed business decisions. Assessing the quality of data used to make business decisions is not only more important than ever but also increasingly difficult, given the growing range of data sources and the volume of data that needs to be evaluated. Poor data quality processes can result in security and privacy risks as well as unnecessary data storage and processing costs due to data duplication. Without trusted and reliable data, enterprises may make decisions based on old, incomplete, incorrect or poorly organized data—or worse, no data. Enterprises have previously sought to improve trust in data using data quality tools and platforms to ensure that data used in decision-making processes is accurate, complete, consistent, timely and valid. These are assessed in ISG’s Data Quality Buyers Guide. Data observability complements the use of data quality products by automating the monitoring of data freshness, distribution, volume, schema and lineage as well as the reliability and health of the overall data environment. The use of automation is an important characteristic of data observability software, expanding the volume of data that can be monitored while also improving efficiency compared to manual data monitoring and management. Automation is also integrated into data quality tools and platforms, however, to the extent that automation should not be considered a defining characteristic that separates data quality from data observability. A clearer distinction can be drawn from the scope and focus of the functionality. Data quality software is concerned with the suitability of the data for a given task. In comparison, data observability is concerned with the reliability and health of the overall data environment. While data quality software helps users identify and resolve data quality problems, data observability software automates the detection and identification of the causes of data quality problems, such as avoiding downtime triggered by lost or inaccurate data due to schema changes, system failures or broken data pipelines, potentially enabling users to prevent data quality issues before they occur. Data observability tools monitor not just the data in an individual environment for a specific purpose at a given point in time, but also the associated upstream and downstream data pipelines. Data observability tools monitor not just the data in an individual environment for a specific purpose at a given point in time but also the associated upstream and downstream data pipelines. In doing so, data observability software ensures that data is available and up to date, avoiding downtime caused by lost or inaccurate data due to schema changes, system failures or broken data pipelines. The two approaches are largely complementary. For example, when the data being assessed remains consistent, data quality tools might not detect a failed pipeline until the data has become out of date. Data observability tools could detect the failure long before the data quality issue arises. Conversely, a change in address might not be identified by data observability tools if the new information adhered to the correct schema. It could be detected—and remediated—using data quality tools. The reciprocal nature of data quality and data observability software products is supported by the fact that some providers offer products in both categories. Others offer products that could be said to include functionality associated with both data observability and data quality. Data observability is an important aspect of Data Operations, which provides an overall approach to automate data monitoring and the continuous delivery of data into operational and analytical processes through the application of agile development, DevOps and lean manufacturing by data engineering professionals in support of data production. In addition to the emergence of standalone data observability software specialists, we also see this functionality being included in wider DataOps platforms. This is a trend we expect to continue. ISG asserts that through 2026, two-thirds of enterprises will invest in initiatives to improve trust in data through automated data observability tools addressing the detection, resolution and prevention of data reliability issues. Potential adopters of data observability are recommended to explore how the software can help increase trust in data as part of a broader evaluation of the people, processes, information and technology improvements required to deliver data-driven decision-making. However, the evolution of data observability is still in its early stages. When evaluating data observability software, potential adopters are advised to pay close attention and assess products carefully. Some data observability products offer quality resolution and remediation functionality traditionally associated with data quality software, albeit not to the same depth and breadth. Additionally, some providers previously associated with data quality have adopted the term data observability but may lack the depth and breadth of pipeline monitoring and error detection capabilities. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Data Observability evaluates software providers and products in key areas, including the detection, resolution and prevention of data reliability issues. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products to address key elements of data observability as we define it: Acceldata, Ataccama, Bigeye, Collibra, Dagster Labs, DataKitchen, DataOps.live, DQLabs, Great Expectations, IBM, Informatica, Monte Carlo, Precisely, Qlik, RightData, Soda and Validio. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Data Observability is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for data observability software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for data observability to an enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of data observability technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of data observability software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating data observability systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds Monte Carlo atop the list, followed by DQLabs and Acceldata. Providers that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. Informatica has done so in six categories, Monte Carlo in five, DQLabs in four, Acceldata and IBM in two, and Collibra and Qlik in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: Acceldata, Collibra, DataOps.live, IBM, Informatica, Monte Carlo and Qlik. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. The providers rated Innovative are Bigeye and DQLabs. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. The providers rated Assurance are: DataKitchen and Precisely. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Ataccama, Dagster Labs, Great Expectations, RightData, Soda and Validio. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle data observability, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (10%), Capability (25%), Reliability (15%), Adaptability (15%) and Manageability (15%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. DQLabs, Monte Carlo and Acceldata were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are Monte Carlo, Informatica, Collibra and IBM. These category leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. While not a Leader, Qlik was also found to meet a broad range of enterprise customer experience requirements. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for Data Observability in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $10 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide support on at least two continents and have at least 50 workers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the past 18 months. The software provider must offer a product or products that supports agile and collaborative data operations and marketed as addressing at least one of the following functional areas, which are mapped into Buyers Guide capability criteria: reliability issue detection, reliability issues resolution and reliability issue prevention. Data observability addresses one of the most significant impediments to generating value from data by providing an environment for monitoring the quality and reliability of data. Maintaining data quality and trust is a perennial data management challenge, often preventing enterprises from operating at the speed of business. To be included in this Buyers Guide requires functionality that addresses the following sections of the capabilities document: Detection of data reliability issues Resolution of data reliability issues Prevention of data reliability issues The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant data observability products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year Acceldata Data Observability Cloud 3.13.0 October 2024 Ataccama Ataccama ONE 15.3.0 August 2024 Bigeye Bigeye November 2024 November 2024 Collibra Data Quality and Observability 2024.10 October 2024 Dagster Labs Dagster+ 1.8.12 October 2024 DataKitchen DataOps Observability 2.2.1 August 2024 DataOps.live DataOps.live October 2024 October 2024 DQLabs DQLabs Platform 3.0.0 August 2024 Great Expectations GX Cloud 1.2.1 October 2024 IBM Data Observability by Databand September 2024 September 2024 Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud October 2024 October 2024 Monte Carlo Monte Carlo October 2024 October 2024 Precisely Data Integrity Suite - Data Observability October 2024 October 2024 Qlik Talend Cloud Data Inventory R2024-09 September 2024 RightData DataTrust 2024.06 June 2024 Soda Soda 3.4.1 October 2024 Validio Validio 4.2 October 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Annual Revenue >$10M Operates on 2 Continents At Least 50 Employees GA Product/ Documentation Acryl Data Acryl Data No Yes No Yes Anomalo Anomalo Yes Yes Yes No Ascend Data Automation Cloud No Yes No Yes Astronomer Astro Observe Yes Yes Yes No Avo.app Avo No Yes No Yes Collate Collate No Yes No Yes Datorios Datorios No Yes No Yes Decube Decube No Yes No Yes Elementary Elementary No Yes No Yes FirstEigen DataBuck No Yes No Yes Integrate.io Data Observability No Yes No Yes Kensu Kensu No Yes No Yes Kleene Kleene No Yes No Yes Lightup Lightup No Yes No Yes Masthead Masthead No Yes No Yes Metaplane Metaplane No Yes No Yes Mozart Data Mozart Data No Yes No Yes Orchestra Technologies Orchestra No Yes No Yes Pantomath Pantomath No Yes No Yes Saturam Qualdo, Piperr No Yes Yes No Sifflet Sifflet No Yes No Yes Snowflake AI Data Cloud Yes Yes Yes No Telmai Telm.ai No Yes No Yes Torana iceDQ No Yes Yes No UpSolver Upsolver No Yes No Yes Y42 Y42 Yes Yes Yes No
Executive Summary U.S. Payroll In the ever-changing world of enterprise operations, payroll is a critical function that sits at the intersection of HR, finance and compliance. To say that payroll is complex is an understatement. Beyond ensuring accurate and timely payments to workers, payroll leaders must navigate a maze of regulatory requirements that vary by location, creating significant challenges. Payroll, therefore, becomes more than a routine process, it plays a pivotal role in minimizing risk, driving operational efficiency and enhancing the employee experience. As digital transformation in the workplace accelerates, enterprises are under pressure to adopt payroll systems that not only keep pace with regulatory changes but also align with broader HR and organizational strategies. Payroll technology has evolved in response to new business models, a rapidly expanding remote workforce and the increasing demand for real-time, automated systems. As digital transformation in the workplace accelerates, enterprises are under pressure to adopt payroll systems that not only keep pace with regulatory changes but also align with broader HR and organizational strategies. ISG Research defines Domestic (U.S.) Payroll as the administration of worker compensation within the United States, encompassing the management of wages, salaries, taxes and deductions in compliance with federal, state and local regulations. Domestic payroll systems must address the complexities of navigating multiple tax jurisdictions, which require frequent updates to reflect changes in legislation. While advancements in technology—such as AI and automation—have improved efficiency by streamlining tax calculations and ensuring accurate payroll processing, the challenge of maintaining compliance across diverse regions remains a critical concern, particularly for smaller organizations with limited resources. Keeping pace with regulatory changes—whether related to payroll taxes, overtime rules or benefits contributions—presents a major challenge, as failing to stay compliant can result in financial penalties, legal risks and damage to an organization’s reputation. Additionally, many enterprises are forced to manage payroll processes with limited resources, often requiring payroll teams to do more with less. This challenge is particularly pronounced for organizations that operate across borders or in multiple regions, where local expertise is necessary to ensure accuracy and compliance. By 2028, one-fifth of enterprises will benefit from payroll platforms that use AI to detect errors and omissions that would prohibit the payroll run, like missed punches, and nudge managers to take action and resolve. Data accuracy is of the highest importance when examining the topic of payroll. Payroll data must be precise not only for the sake of timely payments but also to meet compliance obligations. Errors in payroll calculations can lead to discrepancies that frustrate workers and may even attract regulatory scrutiny. While many organizations have turned to automation to help address these issues, the complexity of managing large-scale payroll operations means that technology alone is not always sufficient. Human oversight, thorough audits and continuous process improvements are often necessary to ensure payroll data accuracy. Remote workforce strategies have introduced additional payroll concerns for many organizations. The shift to remote work, accelerated by global events, has created new layers of complexity. Payroll teams must now account for employees working in different locations, sometimes across state or national borders, which brings up questions around tax withholding, jurisdictional payroll laws and the classification of remote workers or contractors. For many enterprises, existing payroll systems were not designed to handle the nuances of remote work, requiring rapid adjustments to accommodate this new reality. Automated systems that handle everything from tax calculations to compliance reporting are essential for organizations looking to scale payroll operations. Several key trends have emerged in payroll, driven by the demand for more dynamic, real-time solutions. The demand for automation continues to grow as enterprises look for ways to streamline payroll processes, reduce manual interventions and improve overall efficiency. Automated systems that handle everything from tax calculations to compliance reporting are essential for organizations looking to scale payroll operations. While automation reduces errors and frees up valuable human resources, it also requires a payroll system that integrates seamlessly with other enterprise software, such as human capital management systems and time and attendance tools. Another key trend is the increasing use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in payroll. Maximizing these technologies aids detection of anomalies in payroll data, ensures compliance with local laws and even forecasts payroll expenses based on historical data. AI-driven software help organizations reduce errors and mitigate compliance risks by identifying potential issues before they become critical problems. However, while AI is promising, it’s important to recognize that these technologies are still evolving, and enterprises must balance innovation with practical concerns about specific operational needs. The role of payroll within the enterprise is also shifting. HR’s influence on payroll has grown as payroll increasingly intersects with broader HR functions such as employee experience, benefits administration and workforce planning. This shift highlights the need for payroll systems that integrate seamlessly with other HR technologies, providing a more holistic view of the worker’s life cycle. Innovations in payroll technology are transforming how large enterprises manage this critical function. One of the most significant developments is the rise of cloud-based payroll systems, which offer scalability, flexibility and enhanced security compared to traditional on-premises systems. Cloud-based platforms enable organizations to manage payroll operations from anywhere in the world, providing real-time updates and ensuring that payroll teams can stay on top of regulatory changes without delay. These platforms also allow for greater collaboration between payroll, HR and finance teams, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader business goals. Another important innovation impacting payroll software is continuous payroll (or real-time payroll) which enables on-demand wage access. Real-time payroll allows workers to view and access their earned wages in real-time rather than waiting for the traditional pay period to end. This feature has become increasingly popular among employees who seek greater control over their finances and has proven to be a valuable tool for employee retention in industries with high turnover rates. Offering on-demand wage access requires an agile and responsive payroll system capable of processing real-time wage requests without compromising accuracy or compliance. By 2026, one-third of enterprises will offer earned wage access (EWA) to their workforce as on-demand payroll offerings become available for workers who desire and demand pay flexibility. AI-driven compliance is also transforming how enterprises navigate the complex web of tax laws and labor regulations. AI-powered payroll systems can analyze local labor laws, apply them to payroll calculations and ensure that organizations remain compliant across multiple jurisdictions. These systems reduce the risk of human error and streamline the compliance process, freeing up payroll teams to focus on more strategic tasks. However, while AI and automation offer new tools for compliance, many organizations are still grappling with the challenges of adapting legacy systems to today’s software. Despite these technological advances, many enterprises miss opportunities to maximize payroll systems for more than just processing payments. Payroll as a communication tool is often overlooked, yet it provides a unique touchpoint between the organization and its workers. Enterprises can use payroll to communicate important updates, share benefits information, or highlight key company initiatives. By integrating communication into payroll, enterprises engage workers in more meaningful ways, fostering a stronger connection between the workforce and the organization. As payroll technology continues to evolve, the role of payroll within large enterprises is transforming. Once considered a back-office, transactional function, payroll is increasingly seen as a strategic pillar that impacts worker satisfaction, operational efficiency and compliance. Payroll teams collaborate more closely with HR and finance departments, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader organizational goals. This shift underscores the importance of adopting contemporary payroll systems that integrate with other enterprise systems, providing a more holistic view of workforce management. Enterprises that fail to update payroll operations risk falling behind in an increasingly competitive landscape. Embracing cloud-based platforms, real-time payroll, AI-driven compliance and innovative communication tools helps organizations streamline payroll processes and enable better business outcomes. Payroll systems of the future must be agile, adaptable and deeply integrated with other HR and business technologies to meet the needs of a dynamic and evolving workforce. In an era where payroll is rapidly evolving from a back-office function to a strategic asset, the need for contemporary, integrated and scalable payroll software has never been greater. As enterprises face increasing complexity, shifting regulations and evolving worker expectations, it is essential to rethink how payroll systems can better serve the business and its workforce. Whether addressing compliance challenges, capitalizing on automation or seeking to enhance employee engagement, the next step in the payroll journey is to embrace innovation. Enterprises can transform payroll into a tool for operational efficiency and worker satisfaction by evaluating current processes; exploring new technologies like AI, real-time payroll or cloud-based platforms; and ensuring alignment with broader HR strategies. The future of payroll is not just about processing payments—it’s about creating a more agile, compliant and employee-centered function that supports the long-term success of the organization. The future of payroll is not just about processing payments—it’s about creating a more agile, compliant and employee-centered function that supports the long-term success of the organization. Now is the time to take the next step and make payroll a driving force for positive change in the enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Domestic (U.S.) Payroll evaluates software providers and products in key areas intended to explore all aspects of payroll technology, including core payroll capabilities, domestic payroll, IT capabilities, manager capabilities, payroll administration capabilities, payroll analytics, payroll strategies and process needs, integrations and overall support for worker pay needs. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products that address key elements of U.S. Payroll as we define it: ADP, BambooHR, Dayforce, Deel, Gusto, Infor, isolved, Namely, Neeyamo, Netchex, Oracle, Papaya Global, Paychex, Paycom, Paycor, Paylocity, Rippling, SAP, UKG, Unit4 and Workday. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for U.S. Payroll is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for U.S. payroll software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for U.S. payroll to an enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of U.S. payroll technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of U.S. payroll software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating U.S. payroll systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds ADP atop the list, followed by Oracle and UKG. Providers that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. ADP has done so in seven categories, Oracle in six, UKG in four, SAP in two and Dayforce and Workday in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: ADP, Dayforce, Infor, isolved, Oracle, Paychex, SAP, UKG and Workday. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. The providers rated Innovative are: Rippling and Unit4. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. The providers rated Assurance are: Papaya Global and Paycor. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: BambooHR, Deel, Gusto, Namely, Neeyamo, Netchex, Paycom and Paylocity. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle U.S. payroll, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (20%), Capability (20%), Reliability (15%), Adaptability (10%) and Manageability (15%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Oracle, ADP and UKG were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are ADP, Oracle and UKG. These category leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for U.S. Payroll in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $25 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide payroll software supporting U.S. enterprises and have at least 25 customers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the past 18 months. The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant U.S. payroll products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year ADP ADP Vantage HCM SaaS November 2024 BambooHR BambooHR Payroll SaaS November 2024 Dayforce Dayforce Payroll SaaS November 2024 Deel Deel U.S. Payroll SaaS November 2024 Gusto Gusto Payroll SaaS November 2024 Infor Infor HR Payroll SaaS November 2024 isolved isolved Payroll SaaS November 2024 Namely Namely Payroll and Time SaaS November 2024 Neeyamo Global Payroll Core SaaS November 2024 Netchex Netchex Payroll and Tax SaaS November 2024 Oracle Oracle Payroll 24D September 2024 Papaya Global Workforce OS, PayrollPlus SaaS November 2024 Paychex Paychex Flex Enterprise SaaS November 2024 Paycom Paycom Pay, Paycom Beti SaaS November 2024 Paycor Paycor Payroll SaaS November 2024 Paylocity Paylocity Global Payroll SaaS November 2024 Rippling Rippling Payroll SaaS November 2024 SAP SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Payroll 2H2024 November 2024 UKG UKG Pro Payroll 2024.R2 September 2024 Unit4 Unit4 Payroll SaaS November 2024 Workday Workday Payroll SaaS November 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Revenue Customers Scope Geography Darwinbox Darwinbox Payroll Yes Yes No Yes Criterion Criterion HCM No Yes Yes Yes Intuit Quickbooks Payroll Yes Yes No Yes Keka Technologies Private LTD Keka HR and Payroll Yes Yes No Yes NEOGOV NEOGOV Manage Module No Yes Yes Yes Patriot Software Patriot Basic Payroll No Yes Yes Yes Payslip Payslip Global Payroll Control No Yes No Yes Ramco Ramco Global Payroll Yes Yes No Yes Sage Sage Payroll Yes Yes No Yes Trinet Zenefits Payroll Yes Yes No Yes Zalaris Zalaris Payroll Yes Yes No Yes
Executive Summary International Payroll In the ever-changing world of enterprise operations, payroll is a critical function that sits at the intersection of HR, finance and compliance. To say that payroll is complex is an understatement. Beyond ensuring accurate and timely payments to workers, payroll leaders must navigate a maze of regulatory requirements that vary by location, creating significant challenges. Payroll, therefore, becomes more than a routine process; it plays a pivotal role in minimizing risk, driving operational efficiency, and enhancing the employee experience. As digital transformation in the workplace accelerates, enterprises are under pressure to adopt payroll systems that not only keep pace with regulatory changes but align with broader HR and organizational strategies. Payroll technology has evolved in response to new business models, a rapidly expanding remote workforce and the increasing demand for real-time, automated systems. As digital transformation in the workplace accelerates, enterprises are under pressure to adopt payroll systems that not only keep pace with regulatory changes but align with broader HR and organizational strategies. ISG Research defines International Payroll as the administration of worker compensation across national borders, addressing the unique requirements of employees working abroad. This includes managing specialized tax treatments, currency conversions and expatriate compensation packages such as housing and living allowances. International payroll systems must navigate the complexities of compliance with home and host country regulations while providing accurate and timely payments. Advanced technology systems, including real-time currency conversion, cross-border tax compliance and integration with global banking networks, have made managing international payroll more efficient and transparent. However, challenges persist in aligning processes across diverse regions. Keeping pace with regulatory changes—whether related to payroll taxes, overtime rules or benefits contributions—presents a major challenge, as failing to stay compliant can result in financial penalties, legal risks and damage to an organization’s reputation. Additionally, many enterprises are forced to manage payroll processes with limited resources, often requiring payroll teams to do more with less. This challenge is particularly pronounced for organizations that operate across borders or in multiple regions, where local expertise is necessary to ensure accuracy and compliance. By 2028, one-fifth of enterprises will benefit from payroll platforms that use AI to detect errors and omissions that would prohibit the payroll run, like missed punches, and nudge managers to take action and resolve. Data accuracy is of the highest importance when examining the topic of payroll. Payroll data must be precise—not only for the sake of timely payments but also to meet compliance obligations. Errors in payroll calculations can lead to discrepancies that frustrate workers and may even attract regulatory scrutiny. While many organizations have turned to automation to help address these issues, the complexity of managing large-scale payroll operations means that technology alone is not always sufficient. Human oversight, thorough audits and continuous process improvements are often necessary to ensure payroll data accuracy. Remote workforce strategies have introduced additional payroll concerns for many enterprises. The shift to remote work, accelerated by global events, has created new layers of complexity. Payroll teams must now account for employees working in different locations, sometimes across state or national borders, which brings up questions of tax withholding, jurisdictional payroll laws and the classification of remote workers or contractors. For many organizations, existing payroll systems were not designed to handle the nuances of remote work, requiring rapid adjustments to accommodate this new reality. The demand for automation continues to grow as enterprises look for ways to streamline payroll processes, reduce manual interventions and improve overall efficiency. Several key trends have emerged in payroll, driven by the demand for more dynamic, real-time solutions. The demand for automation continues to grow as enterprises look for ways to streamline payroll processes, reduce manual interventions and improve overall efficiency. Automated systems that handle everything from tax calculations to compliance reporting are essential for organizations looking to scale payroll operations. While automation reduces errors and frees up valuable human resources, it also requires a payroll system that integrates seamlessly with other enterprise software, such as human capital management systems and time and attendance tools. Another key trend is the increasing use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in payroll. Enterprises are maximizing these technologies to detect anomalies in payroll data, ensure compliance with local laws and even forecast payroll expenses based on historical data. AI-driven systems help organizations reduce errors and mitigate compliance risks by identifying potential issues before they become critical problems. While AI has promise, it’s important to recognize that these technologies are still evolving, and enterprises must balance innovation with practical concerns about specific operational needs. Additionally, the role of payroll within the enterprise is shifting. HR’s influence on payroll has grown as payroll increasingly intersects with broader HR functions such as employee experience, benefits administration and workforce planning. This shift highlights the need for payroll systems that integrate seamlessly with other HR technologies, providing a more holistic view of the employee life cycle. By 2027, the need for managing payroll globally will require software providers to have a unified offering for enterprises. Innovations in payroll technology are transforming how large enterprises manage this critical function. One of the most significant developments is the rise of cloud-based payroll software, which offers scalability, flexibility and enhanced security compared to traditional on-premises systems. Cloud-based platforms enable enterprises to manage payroll operations from anywhere in the world, providing real-time updates and ensuring that payroll teams stay on top of regulatory changes without delay. These platforms also allow for greater collaboration between payroll, HR and finance teams, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader business goals. Offering on-demand wage access requires an agile and responsive payroll system capable of processing real-time wage requests without compromising accuracy or compliance. Another important innovation impacting payroll software is continuous payroll (or real-time payroll) which enables on-demand wage access. Real-time payroll allows workers to view and access their earned wages in real-time rather than waiting for the traditional pay period to end. This feature has become increasingly popular among employees who seek greater control over their finances and has proven to be a valuable tool for employee retention in industries with high turnover rates. Offering on-demand wage access requires an agile and responsive payroll system capable of processing real-time wage requests without compromising accuracy or compliance. AI-driven compliance is also transforming how enterprises navigate the complex web of tax laws and labor regulations. AI-powered payroll systems analyze local labor laws, apply them to payroll calculations and ensure that organizations remain compliant across multiple jurisdictions. These systems reduce the risk of human error and streamline the compliance process, freeing up payroll teams to focus on more strategic tasks. However, while AI and automation offer new tools for compliance, many enterprises are still grappling with the challenges of adapting legacy systems to today’s systems. Despite these technological advances, many enterprises are missing opportunities to capitalize on payroll systems for more than just processing payments. Payroll as a communication tool is often overlooked, yet it provides a unique touchpoint between the organization and its workers. Organizations can use payroll to communicate important updates, share benefits information or highlight key company initiatives. By integrating communication into payroll, enterprises engage workers in more meaningful ways, fostering a stronger connection between the workforce and the organization. As payroll technology continues to evolve, the role of payroll within large enterprises is transforming. Once considered a back-office, transactional function, payroll is increasingly seen as a strategic pillar that impacts worker satisfaction, operational efficiency and compliance. Payroll teams collaborate more closely with HR and finance departments, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader organizational goals. This shift underscores the importance of adopting contemporary payroll systems that integrate with other enterprise systems, providing a more holistic view of workforce management. Enterprises that fail to update payroll operations risk falling behind in an increasingly competitive landscape. Embracing cloud-based platforms, real-time payroll, AI-driven compliance and innovative communication tools helps organizations streamline payroll processes and drive better business outcomes. The payroll systems of the future must be agile, adaptable and deeply integrated with other HR and business technologies to meet the needs of a dynamic and evolving workforce. Through 2026, one-third of enterprises using payroll management software will deem the paystub as a critical method for communicating information and benefits to the worker. In an era where payroll is rapidly evolving from a back-office function to a strategic asset, the need for contemporary, integrated and scalable payroll software has never been greater. As enterprises face increasing complexity, shifting regulations and evolving worker expectations, it is essential to rethink how payroll systems can better serve the business and its workforce. Whether addressing compliance challenges, capitalizing on automation or seeking to enhance employee engagement, the next step in the payroll journey is to embrace innovation. Enterprises can transform payroll into a tool for operational efficiency and worker satisfaction by evaluating current processes; exploring new technologies like AI, real-time payroll or cloud-based platforms; and ensuring alignment with broader HR strategies. The future of payroll is not just about processing payments; it’s about creating a more agile, compliant and worker-centered function that supports the long-term success of the enterprise. Now is the time to take the next step and make payroll a driving force for positive change. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for International Payroll evaluates software providers and products in key areas intended to explore all aspects of payroll technology, including core payroll capabilities, international payroll capabilities, IT capabilities, manager capabilities, payroll administration capabilities, payroll analytics, payroll strategies and process needs, integrations and overall support for worker pay needs. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products to address key elements of International Payroll as we define it: ADP, Darwinbox, Dayforce, Deel, Gusto, Infor, Neeyamo, Oracle, Oyster, Papaya Global, Paylocity, Rippling, SAP, UKG, Unit4, Workday and Zellis. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for International Payroll is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for international payroll software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for international payroll to an enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of international payroll technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent the best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of international payroll software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating international payroll systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds ADP atop the list, followed by Oracle and UKG. Providers that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. ADP has done so in seven categories, Oracle in six, UKG in four, SAP in two and Dayforce and Workday in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: ADP, Dayforce, Infor, Oracle, SAP, UKG and Workday. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. The providers rated Innovative are: Rippling and Unit4. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. The providers rated Assurance are: Darwinbox and Papaya Global. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Deel, Gusto, Neeyamo, Oyster, Paylocity and Zellis. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle international payroll, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (20%), Capability (25%), Reliability (10%), Adaptability (10%) and Manageability (15%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Oracle, ADP and UKG were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are ADP, Oracle and UKG. These category leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. While not a Leader, SAP was also found to meet a broad range of enterprise customer experience requirements. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for International Payroll in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $50 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide payroll software supporting between two and 25 countries, and have at least 25 customers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the past 18 months. The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant international payroll products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year ADP ADP Global Payroll, Celergo, Global View SaaS November 2024 Darwinbox Darwinbox Payroll SaaS November 2024 Dayforce Dayforce Payroll SaaS November 2024 Deel Deel Global Payroll SaaS November 2024 Gusto Gusto Payroll SaaS November 2024 Infor Infor HR Payroll SaaS November 2024 Neeyamo Global Payroll Core SaaS November 2024 Oracle Oracle Payroll 24D September 2024 Oyster Oyster Global Payroll SaaS October 2024 Papaya Global Workforce OS, PayrollPlus SaaS November 2024 Paylocity Paylocity Global Payroll, Blue Marble Payroll SaaS November 2024 Rippling Rippling Global Payroll SaaS November 2024 SAP SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Payroll 2H2024 November 2024 UKG UKG Pro Payroll, One View 2024.R2 September 2024 Unit4 Unit4 Payroll SaaS November 2024 Workday Workday Payroll, Strada SaaS November 2024 Zellis Zellis Payroll SaaS November 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Revenue Customers Capability Geography CloudPay CloudPay Global Payroll Yes Yes No Yes Criterion Criterion HCM No Yes Yes Yes HiBob Bob’s Payroll Hub Yes Yes Yes No Keka Technologies Private LTD Keka HR & Payroll Yes Yes Yes No Payslip Payslip Global Payroll Control No Yes Yes Yes Ramco Ramco Global Payroll Yes Yes Yes No
Executive Summary Multicountry Payroll In the ever-changing world of enterprise operations, payroll is a critical function that sits at the intersection of HR, finance and compliance. To say that payroll is complex is an understatement. Beyond ensuring accurate and timely payments to workers, payroll leaders must navigate a maze of regulatory requirements that vary by location, creating significant challenges. Payroll, therefore, becomes more than a routine process; it plays a pivotal role in minimizing risk, driving operational efficiency and enhancing the employee experience. Payroll technology has evolved in response to new business models, a rapidly expanding remote workforce and the increasing demand for real-time, automated software. As digital transformation in the workplace accelerates, enterprises are under pressure to adopt payroll systems that keep pace with regulatory changes and also align with broader HR and organizational strategies. ISG Research defines multicountry payroll as the management of worker compensation across multiple countries, requiring a unified approach that balances standardization with adherence to local compliance requirements. Each country’s unique payroll regulations, tax structures and employee benefits present challenges that demand flexible yet consistent processes. Multicountry payroll systems provide a centralized platform capable of addressing local variations while delivering standardized reporting and analytics across regions. Automation plays a critical role in reducing manual intervention, minimizing errors and ensuring compliance, enabling payroll teams to efficiently manage diverse payroll operations on a global scale. Keeping pace with regulatory changes—whether related to payroll taxes, overtime rules or benefits contributions—presents a major challenge, as failing to stay compliant can result in financial penalties, legal risks and damage to an organization’s reputation. Additionally, many enterprises are forced to manage payroll processes with limited resources, often requiring payroll teams to do more with less. This challenge is particularly pronounced for organizations that operate across borders or in multiple regions, where local expertise is necessary to ensure accuracy and compliance. By 2027, the need for managing payroll globally will require software providers to have a unified offering for enterprises. Data accuracy is of the highest importance when examining the topic of payroll. Payroll data must be precise not only for the sake of timely payments but also to meet compliance obligations. Errors in payroll calculations can lead to discrepancies that frustrate workers and may even attract regulatory scrutiny. While many organizations have turned to automation to help address these issues, the complexity of managing large-scale payroll operations means that technology alone is not always sufficient. Human oversight, thorough audits and continuous process improvements are often necessary to ensure payroll data accuracy. For many organizations, existing payroll systems are not designed to handle the nuances of remote work, requiring rapid adjustments to accommodate this new reality. Remote workforce strategies have introduced additional payroll concerns for many organizations. The shift to remote work, accelerated by global events, has created new layers of complexity. Payroll teams must now account for employees working in different locations, sometimes across state or national borders, which brings up questions of tax withholding, jurisdictional payroll laws and the classification of remote workers or contractors. For many organizations, existing payroll systems are not designed to handle the nuances of remote work, requiring rapid adjustments to accommodate this new reality. Several key trends have emerged in payroll, driven by the demand for more dynamic, real-time solutions. The demand for automation continues to grow as enterprises look for ways to streamline payroll processes, reduce manual interventions and improve overall efficiency. Automated systems that handle everything from tax calculations to compliance reporting are essential for organizations looking to scale payroll operations. While automation reduces errors and frees up valuable human resources, it also requires a payroll system that integrates seamlessly with other enterprise software, such as human capital management systems and time and attendance tools. Another key trend is the increasing use of artificial intelligence and machine learning in payroll. Maximizing these technologies can detect anomalies in payroll data, ensure compliance with local laws and even forecast payroll expenses based on historical data. AI-driven software helps organizations reduce errors and mitigate compliance risks by identifying potential issues before they become critical problems. However, while AI offers promising systems, it’s important to recognize that these technologies are still evolving, and enterprises must balance innovation with practical concerns about specific operational needs. The role of payroll within the enterprise is also shifting. HR’s influence on payroll has grown as payroll increasingly intersects with broader HR functions such as employee experience, benefits administration and workforce planning. This shift highlights the need for payroll systems that integrate seamlessly with other HR technologies, providing a more holistic view of the employee life cycle. Innovations in payroll technology are transforming how large enterprises manage this critical function. One of the most significant developments is the rise of cloud-based payroll software, which offers scalability, flexibility, and enhanced security compared to traditional on-premises systems. Cloud-based platforms enable organizations to manage payroll operations from anywhere in the world, providing real-time updates and ensuring that payroll teams stay on top of regulatory changes without delay. These platforms allow for greater collaboration between payroll, HR, and finance teams, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader business goals. Another important innovation impacting payroll software is continuous payroll (or real-time payroll) which enables on-demand wage access. Real-time payroll allows workers to view and access their earned wages in real-time rather than waiting for the traditional pay period to end. This feature has become increasingly popular among employees who seek greater control over their finances and has proven to be a valuable tool for employee retention in industries with high turnover rates. Offering on-demand wage access requires an agile and responsive payroll system capable of processing real-time wage requests without compromising accuracy or compliance. AI-powered payroll systems analyze local labor laws, apply them to payroll calculations and ensure organizations remain compliant across multiple jurisdictions. AI-driven compliance is also transforming how enterprises navigate the complex web of tax laws and labor regulations. AI-powered payroll systems analyze local labor laws, apply them to payroll calculations and ensure organizations remain compliant across multiple jurisdictions. These systems reduce the risk of human error and streamline the compliance process, freeing up payroll teams to focus on more strategic tasks. However, while AI and automation offer new tools for compliance, many organizations are still grappling with the challenges of adapting legacy systems to these contemporary applications. Despite these technological advances, many enterprises are missing opportunities to maximize payroll systems for more than just processing payments. Payroll as a communication tool is often overlooked, yet it provides a unique touchpoint between the organization and its workers. Enterprises can use payroll to communicate important updates, share benefits information or highlight key company initiatives. By integrating communication into payroll, enterprises engage workers in more meaningful ways, fostering a stronger connection between the workforce and the organization. Through 2026, one-quarter of enterprises will look to have a secured conversational and GenAI experience for employees to understand and learn more about the pay and benefits provided by the employer. As payroll technology continues to evolve, the role of payroll within large enterprises is transforming. Once considered a back-office, transactional function, payroll is increasingly seen as a strategic pillar that impacts employee satisfaction, operational efficiency and compliance. Payroll teams collaborate more closely with HR and finance departments, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader organizational goals. This shift underscores the importance of adopting contemporary payroll applications that integrate with other enterprise systems, providing a more holistic view of workforce management. Enterprises that fail to update payroll operations risk falling behind in an increasingly competitive landscape. Enterprises that fail to update payroll operations risk falling behind in an increasingly competitive landscape. Embracing cloud-based platforms, real-time payroll, AI-driven compliance and innovative communication tools helps organizations streamline payroll processes and enable better business outcomes. Payroll systems of the future must be agile, adaptable and deeply integrated with other HR and business technologies to meet the needs of a dynamic and evolving workforce. In an era where payroll is rapidly evolving from a back-office function to a strategic asset, the need for current, integrated and scalable payroll systems has never been greater. As enterprises face increasing complexity, shifting regulations and evolving worker expectations, it is essential to rethink how payroll systems can better serve the business and its workforce. Whether addressing compliance challenges, capitalizing on automation or seeking to enhance worker engagement, the next step in the payroll journey is to embrace innovation. Enterprises can transform payroll into a tool for operational efficiency and worker satisfaction by evaluating current processes; exploring new technologies like AI, real-time payroll or cloud-based platforms; and ensuring alignment with broader HR strategies. The future of payroll is not just about processing payments—it’s about creating a more agile, compliant and worker-centered function that supports the long-term success of the organization. Now is the time to take the next step and make payroll a driving force for positive change. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Multicountry Payroll evaluates software providers and products in key areas intended to explore all aspects of payroll technology, including core payroll capabilities, multicountry payroll capabilities, IT capabilities, manager capabilities, payroll administration capabilities, payroll analytics, payroll strategies and process needs, integrations and overall support for worker pay needs. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products to address key elements of multicountry payroll as we define it: ADP, Darwinbox, Dayforce, Deel, Infor, Neeyamo, Oracle, Oyster, Papaya Global, Paylocity, SAP, UKG and Workday. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Multi-Country Payroll is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for multicountry payroll software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for multicountry payroll to an enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of multicountry payroll technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of multicountry payroll software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating multicountry payroll systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds ADP atop the list, followed by Oracle and UKG. Providers that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. ADP has done so in seven categories, Oracle in six, UKG in four, SAP in two and Dayforce and Workday in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: ADP, Dayforce, Infor, Oracle, SAP, UKG and Workday. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Darwinbox, Deel, Neeyamo, Oyster, Papaya Global and Paylocity. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle multicountry payroll, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (20%), Capability (30%), Reliability (10%), Adaptability (10%) and Manageability (10%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Oracle, ADP and UKG were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are ADP, Oracle and UKG. These category leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for Multicountry Payroll in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $50 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide support in 25-49 countries, and have at least 25 customers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the past 18 months. The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant multicountry payroll products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year ADP ADP Global Payroll, Celergo, Global View SaaS November 2024 Darwinbox Darwinbox Payroll SaaS November 2024 Dayforce Dayforce Payroll SaaS November 2024 Deel Deel Global Payroll SaaS November 2024 Infor Infor HR Payroll SaaS November 2024 Neeyamo Global Payroll Core SaaS November 2024 Oracle Oracle Payroll 24D September 2024 Oyster Oyster Global Payroll SaaS October 2024 Papaya Global Workforce OS, PayrollPlus SaaS November 2024 Paylocity Paylocity Global Payroll, Blue Marble Payroll SaaS November 2024 SAP SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Payroll 2H2024 November 2024 UKG UKG Pro Payroll, One View 2024.R2 September 2024 Workday Workday Payroll, Strada SaaS November 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Revenue Customers Capability Geography CloudPay CloudPay Global Payroll Yes Yes No Yes Ramco Ramco Global Payroll Yes Yes No No Rippling Rippling Global Payroll Yes Yes Yes No Unit4 Unit4 Payroll Yes Yes Yes No
Executive Summary Payroll Management In the ever-changing world of enterprise operations, payroll is a critical function that sits at the intersection of HR, finance and compliance. To say that payroll is complex is an understatement. Beyond ensuring accurate and timely payments to workers, payroll leaders must navigate a maze of regulatory requirements that vary by location, creating significant challenges. Payroll, therefore, becomes more than a routine process; it plays a pivotal role in minimizing risk, driving operational efficiency and enhancing the employee experience. Payroll technology has evolved in response to new business models, a rapidly expanding remote workforce and the increasing demand for real-time, automated systems. As digital transformation in the workplace accelerates, enterprises are under pressure to adopt payroll systems that keep pace with regulatory changes and align with broader HR and organizational strategies. Advanced technologies enable organizations to adapt to the dynamic needs of a diverse workforce, streamline processes and deliver accurate, timely compensation, regardless of location. ISG Research defines Global Payroll as the administration of worker compensation on a worldwide scale, addressing the complexities faced by multinational organizations managing payroll across multiple countries. This requires systems that navigate diverse labor laws, tax regimes and social benefits structures while maintaining a unified and compliant approach. Global payroll systems leverage advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence-driven analytics, centralized reporting and automation to streamline processes, ensure compliance and minimize errors across varied regulatory landscapes. These tools are essential for managing the intricacies of global operations while maintaining accuracy and efficiency. Keeping pace with regulatory changes—whether related to payroll taxes, overtime rules or benefits contributions—presents a major challenge, as failing to stay compliant can result in financial penalties, legal risks and damage to an organization’s reputation. Additionally, many enterprises are forced to manage payroll processes with limited resources, often requiring payroll teams to do more with less. This challenge is particularly pronounced for organizations that operate across borders or in multiple regions, where local expertise is necessary to ensure accuracy and compliance. Data accuracy is of the highest importance when examining the topic of payroll. Payroll data must be precise not only for the sake of timely payments but also to meet compliance obligations. Errors in payroll calculations lead to discrepancies that frustrate workers and may even attract regulatory scrutiny. While many enterprises have turned to automation to address these issues, the complexity of managing large-scale payroll operations means that technology alone is not always sufficient. Human oversight, thorough audits and continuous process improvements are often necessary to ensure payroll data accuracy. Remote workforce strategies have introduced additional payroll concerns for many enterprises. The shift to remote work, accelerated by global events, has created new layers of complexity. Payroll teams must now account for employees working in different locations, sometimes across state or national borders, which brings up questions of tax withholding, jurisdictional payroll laws and the classification of remote workers or contractors. For many organizations, existing payroll systems were not designed to handle the nuances of remote work, requiring rapid adjustments to accommodate this new reality. Several key trends have emerged in payroll, driven by the demand for more dynamic, real-time solutions. The demand for automation continues to grow as enterprises look for ways to streamline payroll processes, reduce manual interventions and improve overall efficiency. Automated systems that handle everything from tax calculations to compliance reporting are essential for organizations looking to scale payroll operations. While automation reduces errors and frees up valuable human resources, it also requires a payroll system that integrates seamlessly with other enterprise software, such as human capital management systems and time and attendance tools. Another key trend is the increasing use of AI and machine learning in payroll. Maximizing these technologies can detect anomalies in payroll data, ensure compliance with local laws and even forecast payroll expenses based on historical data. AI-driven software helps organizations reduce errors and mitigate compliance risks by identifying potential issues before they become critical problems. However, while AI is promising, it’s important to recognize that these technologies are still evolving, and enterprises must balance innovation with practical concerns about specific operational needs. By 2028, one-fifth of enterprises will benefit from payroll platforms that use AI to detect errors and omissions that would prohibit the payroll run, like missed punches, and nudge managers to take action and resolve. Additionally, the role of payroll within the enterprise is shifting. HR’s influence on payroll has grown as payroll increasingly intersects with broader HR functions such as worker experience, benefits administration and workforce planning. This shift highlights the need for payroll systems that integrate seamlessly with other HR technologies, providing a more holistic view of the employee life cycle. Innovations in payroll technology are transforming how large enterprises manage this critical function. One of the most significant developments is the rise of cloud-based payroll systems, which offer scalability, flexibility and enhanced security compared to traditional on-premises systems. Cloud-based platforms enable organizations to manage payroll operations from anywhere in the world, providing real-time updates and ensuring that payroll teams stay on top of regulatory changes without delay. These platforms also allow for greater collaboration between payroll, HR and finance teams, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader business goals. Another important innovation impacting payroll software is continuous payroll (or real-time payroll) which enables on-demand wage access. Real-time payroll allows workers to view and access their earned wages in real-time rather than waiting for the traditional pay period to end. This feature has become increasingly popular among employees who seek greater control over their finances and has proven to be a valuable tool for employee retention in industries with high turnover rates. Offering on-demand wage access requires an agile and responsive payroll system capable of processing real-time wage requests without compromising accuracy or compliance. AI-driven compliance is also transforming how enterprises navigate the complex web of tax laws and labor regulations. AI-powered payroll systems analyze local labor laws, apply them to payroll calculations and ensure enterprises remain compliant across multiple jurisdictions. These systems reduce the risk of human error and streamline the compliance process, freeing up payroll teams to focus on more strategic tasks. However, while AI and automation offer new tools for compliance, many organizations are still grappling with the challenges of adapting legacy systems to contemporary software. Payroll as a communication tool is often overlooked, yet it provides a unique touchpoint between the organization and its workers. Despite these technological advances, many enterprises miss opportunities to capitalize on payroll systems for more than just processing payments. Payroll as a communication tool is often overlooked, yet it provides a unique touchpoint between the organization and its workers. Organizations can use payroll to communicate important updates, share benefits information or highlight key company initiatives. By integrating communication into payroll, companies engage workers in more meaningful ways, fostering a stronger connection between the workforce and the organization. Through 2026, one-third of enterprises using payroll management software will deem the paystub as a critical method for communicating information and benefits to the worker. As payroll technology continues to evolve, the role of payroll within large enterprises is transforming. Once considered a back-office, transactional function, payroll is increasingly seen as a strategic pillar that impacts worker satisfaction, operational efficiency and compliance. Payroll teams collaborate more closely with HR and finance departments, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader organizational goals. This shift underscores the importance of adopting contemporary payroll software that integrates with other enterprise systems, providing a more holistic view of workforce management. Enterprises that fail to update payroll operations risk falling behind in an increasingly competitive landscape. Embracing cloud-based platforms, real-time payroll, AI-driven compliance and innovative communication tools helps organizations streamline payroll processes and drive better business outcomes. The payroll systems of the future must be agile, adaptable and deeply integrated with other HR and business technologies to meet the needs of a dynamic and evolving workforce. In an era where payroll is rapidly evolving from a back-office function to a strategic asset, the need for updated, integrated and scalable payroll systems has never been greater. In an era where payroll is rapidly evolving from a back-office function to a strategic asset, the need for updated, integrated and scalable payroll systems has never been greater. As enterprises face increasing complexity, shifting regulations and evolving worker expectations, it is essential to rethink how payroll systems can better serve the business and its workforce. Whether addressing compliance challenges, capitalizing on automation or seeking to enhance employee engagement, the next step in the payroll journey is to embrace innovation. Enterprises can transform payroll into a tool for operational efficiency and employee satisfaction by evaluating current processes; exploring new technologies like AI, real-time payroll or cloud-based platforms; and ensuring alignment with broader HR strategies. The future of payroll is not just about processing payments—it’s about creating a more agile, compliant and worker-centered function that supports the long-term success of the organization. Now is the time to take the next step and make payroll a driving force for positive change. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Global Payroll evaluates software providers and products in key areas intended to explore all aspects of payroll technology, including core payroll capabilities, global payroll capabilities, IT capabilities, manager capabilities, payroll administration capabilities, payroll analytics, payroll strategies and process needs, integrations and overall support for worker pay needs. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products to address key elements of Global Payroll as we define it: ADP, Dayforce, Deel, Infor, Neeyamo, Oracle, Papaya Global, Paylocity, SAP, UKG and Workday. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Global Payroll is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for global payroll software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for global payroll to an enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of global payroll technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of global payroll software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating global payroll systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds ADP atop the list, followed by Oracle and UKG. Providers that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. ADP has done so in all seven categories, Oracle in six, UKG in four, SAP in two and Dayforce and Workday in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: ADP, Dayforce, Oracle, SAP, UKG and Workday. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Deel, Infor, Neeyamo, Papaya Global and Paylocity. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle global payroll, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (20%), Capability (30%), Reliability (10%), Adaptability (10%) and Manageability (10%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Oracle, ADP and UKG were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience category are ADP, Oracle and UKG. These category leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for Global Payroll in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $100 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide software for payroll support on at least three continents and 50+ countries, and have at least 25 customers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the last 18 months. The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant global payroll products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year ADP ADP Global Payroll, Celergo, Global View SaaS November 2024 Dayforce Dayforce Payroll SaaS November 2024 Deel Deel Global Payroll SaaS November 2024 Infor Infor HR Payroll SaaS November 2024 Neeyamo Global Payroll Core SaaS November 2024 Oracle Oracle Payroll 24D September 2024 Papaya Global Workforce OS, PayrollPlus SaaS November 2024 Paylocity Paylocity Global Payroll, Blue Marble Payroll SaaS November 2024 SAP SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Payroll 2H2024 November 2024 UKG UKG Pro Payroll, One View 2024.R2 September 2024 Workday Workday Payroll, Strada SaaS November 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Revenue Customers Capability Geography Darwinbox Darwinbox Payroll Yes Yes Yes No Oyster Oyster Global Payroll Yes Yes Yes No Rippling Rippling Global Payroll Yes Yes Yes No CloudPay CloudPay Global Payroll Yes Yes No Yes
Executive Summary Payroll Management In the ever-changing world of enterprise operations, payroll is a critical function that sits at the intersection of HR, finance and compliance. To say that payroll is complex is an understatement. Beyond ensuring accurate and timely payments to workers, payroll leaders must navigate a maze of regulatory requirements that vary by location, creating significant challenges. Payroll, therefore, becomes more than a routine process; it plays a pivotal role in minimizing risk, driving operational efficiency and enhancing the employee experience. Payroll technology has evolved in response to new business models, a rapidly expanding remote workforce and the increasing demand for real-time, automated systems. As digital transformation in the workplace accelerates, enterprises are under pressure to adopt payroll systems that keep pace with regulatory changes and align with broader HR and organizational strategies. Advanced technologies enable organizations to adapt to the dynamic needs of a diverse workforce, streamline processes and deliver accurate, timely compensation, regardless of location. ISG Research defines Payroll Management as the end-to-end administration of worker compensation across various geographic and regulatory landscapes, encompassing domestic, international, multicountry and global operations. Effective payroll management requires navigating the intricate web of local, national and international tax laws; labor regulations; and employee benefit structures. For domestic (U.S.) payroll, this means maintaining compliance with federal, state and local requirements. In international and multicountry contexts, payroll must account for cross-border complexities such as currency conversions, expatriate packages and jurisdiction-specific tax treatments. On a global scale, payroll management demands a unified approach that ensures compliance while providing centralized reporting, artificial intelligence-driven analytics and automation to reduce manual effort and minimize errors. Advanced technologies enable organizations to adapt to the dynamic needs of a diverse workforce, streamline processes and deliver accurate, timely compensation, regardless of location. Keeping pace with regulatory changes—whether related to payroll taxes, overtime rules or benefits contributions—presents a major challenge, as failing to stay compliant can result in financial penalties, legal risks and damage to an organization’s reputation. Additionally, many enterprises are forced to manage payroll processes with limited resources, often requiring payroll teams to do more with less. This challenge is particularly pronounced for organizations that operate across borders or in multiple regions, where local expertise is necessary to ensure accuracy and compliance. Data accuracy is of the highest importance when examining the topic of payroll. Payroll data must be precise not only for the sake of timely payments but also to meet compliance obligations. Errors in payroll calculations can lead to discrepancies that frustrate workers and may attract regulatory scrutiny. While many enterprises have turned to automation to help address these issues, the complexity of managing large-scale payroll operations means that technology alone is not always sufficient. Human oversight, thorough audits and continuous process improvements are often necessary to ensure payroll data accuracy. Remote workforce strategies have introduced additional payroll concerns for many organizations. The shift to remote work, accelerated by global events, has created new layers of complexity. Payroll teams must now account for employees working in different locations, sometimes across state or national borders, which brings up questions of tax withholding, jurisdictional payroll laws and the classification of remote workers or contractors. For many organizations, existing payroll systems were not designed to handle the nuances of remote work, requiring rapid adjustments to accommodate this new reality. By 2027, the need for managing payroll globally will require software provides to have a unified offering for enterprises. Several trends have emerged in payroll, driven by the demand for more dynamic, real-time software. The demand for automation continues to grow as enterprises look for ways to streamline payroll processes, reduce manual interventions and improve overall efficiency. Automated systems that handle everything from tax calculations to compliance reporting are essential for organizations looking to scale payroll operations. While automation reduces errors and frees up valuable human resources, it also requires a payroll system that integrates seamlessly with other enterprise software, such as human capital management systems and time and attendance tools. Another key trend is the increasing use of AI and machine learning in payroll. These technologies are detecting anomalies in payroll data, ensuring compliance with local laws and forecasting payroll expenses based on historical data. AI-driven systems help organizations reduce errors and mitigate compliance risks by identifying potential issues before they become critical problems. While AI offers promising solutions, it’s important to recognize that these technologies are still evolving, and enterprises must balance innovation with practical concerns about specific operational needs. Additionally, the role of payroll within the enterprise is shifting. HR’s influence on payroll has grown as payroll increasingly intersects with broader HR functions such as worker experience, benefits administration and workforce planning. This shift highlights the need for payroll systems that integrate seamlessly with other HR technologies, providing a more holistic view of the employee life cycle. Innovations in payroll technology are transforming how large enterprises manage this critical function. One of the most significant developments is the rise of cloud-based payroll systems, which offer scalability, flexibility and enhanced security compared to traditional on-premises systems. Cloud-based platforms enable organizations to manage payroll operations from anywhere in the world, providing real-time updates and ensuring that payroll teams stay on top of regulatory changes without delay. These platforms also allow for greater collaboration between payroll, HR and finance teams, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader business goals. Another important innovation impacting payroll software is continuous payroll (or real-time payroll) which enables on-demand wage access. Real-time payroll allows workers to view and access their earned wages in real-time rather than waiting for the traditional pay period to end. This feature has become increasingly popular among employees who seek greater control over their finances and has proven to be a valuable tool for employee retention in industries with high turnover rates. Offering on-demand wage access requires an agile and responsive payroll system capable of processing real-time wage requests without compromising accuracy or compliance. By 2027, one-quarter of enterprises will offer their workers financial wellness support such as personal budgeting and planning tools and services and earned wage access offerings at no cost to employees. AI-driven compliance is also transforming how enterprises navigate the complex web of tax laws and labor regulations. AI-powered payroll systems analyze local labor laws, apply them to payroll calculations and ensure that organizations remain compliant across multiple jurisdictions. These systems reduce the risk of human error and streamline the compliance process, freeing up payroll teams to focus on more strategic tasks. However, while AI and automation are providing new tools for compliance, many organizations are still grappling with the challenges of adapting legacy systems to today’s software. Despite these technological advances, many enterprises are missing opportunities to capitalize on payroll systems for more than just processing payments. Payroll as a communication tool is often overlooked, yet it provides a unique touchpoint between the organization and its workers. Organizations can use payroll to communicate important updates, share benefits information or highlight key company initiatives. By integrating communication into payroll, enterprises engage workers in more meaningful ways, fostering a stronger connection between the workforce and the organization. As payroll technology continues to evolve, the role of payroll within large enterprises is transforming. Once considered a back-office, transactional function, payroll is increasingly seen as a strategic pillar that impacts worker satisfaction, operational efficiency and compliance. Payroll teams collaborate more closely with HR and finance departments, ensuring that payroll processes align with broader organizational goals. This shift underscores the importance of adopting contemporary payroll systems that integrate with other enterprise systems, providing a more holistic view of workforce management. Enterprises that fail to update payroll operations risk falling behind in an increasingly competitive landscape. By embracing cloud-based platforms, real-time payroll, AI-driven compliance and innovative communication tools, organizations streamline payroll processes and drive better business outcomes. The payroll systems of the future must be agile, adaptable and deeply integrated with other HR and business technologies to meet the needs of a dynamic and evolving workforce. In an era where payroll is rapidly evolving from a back-office function to a strategic asset, the need for contemporary, integrated and scalable payroll systems has never been greater. In an era where payroll is rapidly evolving from a back-office function to a strategic asset, the need for contemporary, integrated and scalable payroll systems has never been greater. As enterprises face increasing complexity, shifting regulations and evolving employee expectations, it is essential to rethink how payroll systems can better serve both the business and its workforce. Whether addressing compliance challenges, leveraging automation or seeking to enhance employee engagement, the next step in the payroll journey is to embrace innovation. Enterprises can transform payroll into a tool for operational efficiency and worker satisfaction by evaluating current processes; exploring new technologies like AI, real-time payroll or cloud-based platforms; and ensuring alignment with broader HR strategies. The future of payroll is not just about processing payments; it’s about creating a more agile, compliant and worker-centered function that supports the long-term success of the organization. Now is the time to take the next step and make payroll a driving force for positive change. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Payroll Management evaluates software providers and products in key areas intended to explore all aspects of payroll technology, including core payroll capabilities, global payroll capabilities, international payroll capabilities, multicountry payroll capabilities, domestic (U.S.) payroll capabilities, IT capabilities, manager capabilities, payroll administration capabilities, payroll analytics, payroll strategies and process needs, integrations and overall support for worker pay needs. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products to address key elements of Payroll Management as we define it: ADP, Dayforce, Infor, Neeyamo, Oracle, Paylocity, SAP, UKG and Workday. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Payroll Management is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for payroll management software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for payroll management to an enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of payroll management technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of payroll management software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating payroll management systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds ADP atop the list, followed by Oracle and UKG. Providers that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. ADP has done so in seven categories, Oracle in six, UKG in four, SAP in two and Dayforce and Workday in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: ADP, Dayforce, Oracle, SAP and UKG. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Infor, Neeyamo, Paylocity and Workday. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle payroll management, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (15%), Capability (30%), Reliability (10%), Adaptability (15%) and Manageability (10%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Oracle, ADP and UKG were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are ADP, Oracle and UKG. These category leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for Payroll Management in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $100 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide software for payroll support on at least three continents, more than 50 countries (including US), and have at least 25 customers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the last 18 months. The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant payroll management products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year ADP ADP Global Payroll, Celergo, Global View, ADP Vantage HCM SaaS November 2024 Dayforce Dayforce Payroll SaaS November 2024 Infor Infor HR Payroll SaaS November 2024 Neeyamo Global Payroll Core SaaS November 2024 Oracle Oracle Payroll 24D September 2024 Paylocity Paylocity Global Payroll, Blue Marble Payroll SaaS November 2024 SAP SAP SuccessFactors Employee Central Payroll 2H2024 November 2024 UKG UKG Pro Payroll, One View 2024.R2 September 2024 Workday Workday Payroll, Strada SaaS November 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Revenue Customers Capability Geography Darwinbox Darwinbox Payroll Yes Yes Yes No Rippling Rippling Global Payroll Yes Yes Yes No CloudPay CloudPay Global Payroll Yes Yes No Yes
Executive Summary Midsize ERP Manufacturing Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are comprehensive software platforms designed to integrate and manage all the core processes of an enterprise while recording transactions and their financial consequences to support the accounting and finance functions. These systems streamline cross-functional operations using workflows and consolidate data created by various departments such as finance, human resources, supply chain and customer relationship management into a unified database. This integration facilitates the accessibility of real-time data, enhancing situational awareness for executives and managers while boosting overall efficiency and productivity. Industry specialization can make ERP software more attractive to relevant buyers because of the deeper built-in functionality suited to their requirements with a potentially lower total cost of ownership with and productivity. The market for ERP systems can be segmented by the nature of the business and the size of the enterprise. At a general level, ERP systems serve the needs of companies that deal in physical products such as manufacturing or goods distribution, and those that are services oriented, such as financial services, entertainment and intellectual property. However, software providers may also tailor their systems to serve the specific needs of an industry such as healthcare or even a specific niche subvertical in that industry such as hospitals or pharmaceuticals. Industry specialization can make ERP software more attractive to relevant buyers because of the deeper built-in functionality suited to their requirements with a potentially lower total cost of ownership while achieving greater productivity. ISG Software Research defines large enterprises as those with 1,000 or more employees. Systems for these enterprises, often referred to as Tier I, are complex with deep functionality and are highly configurable to support even specialized and intricate business processes. They are designed to scale to support thousands of users at multiple global locations while managing large volumes of transactions and data. This flexibility and scalability can come at a cost because of the time and effort required to implement and maintain the system. We define “midsize” as enterprises with between 100 and 999 employees. Midsize ERP systems (Tier II) offer robust functionality but with less complexity, providing a practical balance of features and ease of use, often with industry-specific capabilities. While scalable, ERP systems for midsize companies are generally tailored to support fewer users and locations. They are suitable for growing businesses but may require upgrades as the company expands. They are typically faster to implement and can be more cost-effective. They typically offer pre-configured solutions that reduce the need for extensive customization. Large enterprises may also use one or more Tier II applications in specific divisions or business units. ERP systems have served as the central nervous system of enterprises for over thirty years, managing essential business processes and recordkeeping. The software traces its origins to Material Requirements Planning (MRP) developed in the 1960s to help manufacturers manage inventories and production schedules. Manufacturing Resource Planning (MRP II) added related functions such as quality assurance and equipment maintenance. Meanwhile, accounting systems were evolving in the scope of their functionality while using technology to make such systems increasingly affordable to smaller enterprises. By the 1990s, the development of relational databases, the graphical user interface (GUI), more sophisticated event-driven programming languages and widespread adoption of personal computers brought about ERP systems that could bring together a wider set of functions and business processes while offering greater flexibility in how individual enterprises could design and manage their operations. The arrival of ERP systems coincided with management consultants’ focus on “business process reengineering,” which could be assisted with implementing an ERP system. The widespread adoption of ERP resulted in a general flattening of organizational structures as fewer middle managers were required to operate effectively. Cloud-based ERP systems began to emerge in the 2000s with the near-total adoption of the internet in most developed countries. Adoption of these systems was initially slow, partly because the cost, operational complexity and risks of changing ERP software means that enterprises replace them only when absolutely necessary. Our research has found that the average age of a system is seven years, suggesting a replacement cycle well over a decade. Services businesses have been faster to move their ERP system to the cloud because product-based companies typically need to more heavily customize their software to support their operations. However, the tide has turned as most companies look to replace their on-premises software. We assert that by 2027, over 80% of ERP systems purchased by non-product companies will be deployed in the cloud to promote continuity, improve performance and lower costs. While their fundamental organization remains largely unchanged, modern ERP systems now boast enhanced functional depth, usability, adaptability and manageability, particularly in cloud-based environments that are easier to maintain. Over the past two decades, continuous refinement and development tailored to specific industries have increased their utility and decreased overall ownership costs, particularly in implementation and maintenance. Foundational technologies and architecture have also evolved, allowing greater customization capabilities in shared (multi-tenant) computing environments while allowing ongoing development of the core software. Providers offer software development kits (SDKs) to allow third parties to apply their subject matter expertise to extend the capabilities of their system. Application programming interfaces (APIs) allow for easier and reliable integration of different software categories. Current technology trends will revolutionize ERP systems. Innovations such as artificial intelligence (AI), generative AI (GenAI), natural language processing (NLP), agents and agentic devices promise to transform how individuals and enterprises work with the software. Change is already underway. Some straightforward, low risk features such as anomaly detection to flag potential errors are already in place. Technology will make even complex processes faster and easier to execute, and some tasks will be largely or completely automated by agents. AI will condense highly repetitive accounting and other tasks through automation to address the need for greater administrative staff productivity and enable enterprises to attract and retain the best talent. We assert that by 2027, almost all providers of ERP software will have incorporated AI to reduce workloads and speed processes and reduce errors. When considering modernization or replacement of existing ERP software, it is crucial to understand how a new system can complement current capabilities and how to effectively manage the resulting organizational changes. The decision to replace a core ERP system is challenging due to associated costs and potential disruptions. Yet, executives—especially the CFO—must also recognize how outdated systems pose risks to the continued smooth operation of the enterprise. It is also essential to recognize that the capabilities and supporting technology of these systems have evolved slowly but significantly over time. The shift from on-premises to cloud-based ERP continues to accelerate, driven by improved configurability and customization options for specific industries. Terms like “configuration” and “customization” define how systems can adapt to user needs without altering the core code. Moreover, executives must recognize the need for a strategic approach to assessing the software rather than a simple like-for-like replacement. This is especially true in assessing the AI direction of providers. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Midsize Manufacturing ERP excludes providers that derive more than two-thirds of their total software revenue from customers with more than 1,000 employees. It assesses offerings from the remaining providers that meet our inclusion criteria and focuses on how these applications address the needs of product-centric and manufacturing operations of these enterprises. The guide assesses the software’s ability to support manufacturing operations, advanced planning and scheduling, demand planning, manufacturing execution, shop floor management, material flow optimization, multi-site operations, quality management, facilities and equipment maintenance, warranty management, environmental, smart manufacturing and distribution. AI-enabled features and functions are also part of the evaluation. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products that address key elements of midsize manufacturing ERP as we define it: Abas, Acumatica, Aptean, Epicor, Exact, IFS, Infor, Microsoft, Oracle NetSuite, QAD, Ramco, Rockwell Automation, Sage X3 and SAP Business One. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Midsize ERP Manufacturing is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for midsize manufacturing ERP software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for manufacturing ERP to a midsize enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of midsize manufacturing ERP technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of manufacturing ERP software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge midsize enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating manufacturing ERP systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds Infor atop the list, followed by IFS and Sage X3. Companies that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. Infor has done so in six categories; SAP Business One, IFS, Sage X3 and Oracle NetSuite in three; and Acumatica, QAD and Epicor in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: Acumatica, IFS, Infor, Sage X3 and SAP Business One. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. The providers rated Innovative are: Epicor and Microsoft. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. The providers rated Assurance are: Oracle NetSuite and QAD. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Abas, Aptean, Exact, Ramco and Rockwell Automation. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how midsize enterprises handle manufacturing ERP, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (10%), Capability (35%), Reliability (15%), Adaptability (10%) and Manageability (10%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Infor, IFS and Epicor were designated Product Experience Leaders. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI 10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are Oracle NetSuite, Infor and Sage X3. These category Leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support their customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for Midsize ERP Manufacturing in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $40 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, sell products and provide support on at least two countries, and have at least 50 customers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the last 12 months. This report includes providers that only support manufacturing or product-related industries and only evaluates the capabilities designed for these enterprises as detailed below. The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant midsize ERP manufacturing products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year Abas Abas ERP Cloud Edition V.2024 October 2024 Acumatica Acumatica ERP v. 2024 R2 October 2024 Aptean Aptean Industrial Manufacturing ERP Made2Manage Edition October 2024 Epicor Epicor Kinetic v.2024.2 Fall 2024 Exact Exact Globe+ Online Product Update 502 July 2024 IFS IFS Cloud v. 24R2 October 2024 Infor Infor CloudSuite ERP v.2024 October 2024 Microsoft Microsoft Dynamics 365 v. Release Wave 2 October 2024 Oracle NetSuite Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP Update 24C July 2024 QAD QAD Adaptive ERP v.2024 August 2024 Ramco Ramco ERP v.2024 October 2024 Rockwell Automation Plex ERP v.2024 October 2024 Sage X3 Sage X3 v. 2024 R1 (12.0.35) April 2024 SAP Business One SAP Business One 10 v. FP 2208 June 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Good Standing Revenue Geography Customers Priority Software Priority ERP No Yes Yes Yes Rootstock Software Manufacturing ERP No Yes Yes Yes Syspro Syspro ERP No Yes Yes Yes
Executive Summary ERP Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are comprehensive software platforms designed to integrate and manage all the core processes of an enterprise while recording transactions and their financial consequences to support the accounting and finance functions. These systems streamline cross-functional operations using workflows and consolidate data created by various departments such as finance, human resources, supply chain and customer relationship management into a unified database. This integration facilitates the accessibility of real-time data, enhancing situational awareness for executives and managers while boosting overall efficiency and productivity. Industry specialization can make ERP software more attractive to relevant buyers because of the deeper built-in functionality suited to their requirements with a potentially lower total cost of ownership with and productivity. The market for ERP systems can be segmented by the nature of the business and the size of the enterprise. At a general level, ERP systems serve the needs of companies that deal in physical products such as manufacturing or goods distribution, and those that are services oriented, such as financial services, entertainment and intellectual property. However, software providers may also tailor their systems to serve the specific needs of an industry such as healthcare or even a specific niche subvertical in that industry such as hospitals or pharmaceuticals. Industry specialization can make ERP software more attractive to relevant buyers because of the deeper built-in functionality suited to their requirements with a potentially lower total cost of ownership while achieving greater productivity. ISG Software Research defines large enterprises as those with 1,000 or more employees. Systems for these enterprises, often referred to as Tier I, are complex with deep functionality and are highly configurable to support even specialized and intricate business processes. They are designed to scale to support thousands of users at multiple global locations while managing large volumes of transactions and data. This flexibility and scalability can come at a cost because of the time and effort required to implement and maintain the system. We define “midsize” as enterprises with between 100 and 999 employees. Midsize ERP systems (Tier II) offer robust functionality but with less complexity, providing a practical balance of features and ease of use, often with industry-specific capabilities. While scalable, ERP systems for midsize companies are generally tailored to support fewer users and locations. They are suitable for growing businesses but may require upgrades as the company expands. They are typically faster to implement and can be more cost-effective. They typically offer pre-configured solutions that reduce the need for extensive customization. Large enterprises may also use one or more Tier II applications in specific divisions or business units. ERP systems have served as the central nervous system of enterprises for over thirty years, managing essential business processes and recordkeeping. The software traces its origins to Material Requirements Planning (MRP) developed in the 1960s to help manufacturers manage inventories and production schedules. Manufacturing Resource Planning (MRP II) added related functions such as quality assurance and equipment maintenance. Meanwhile, accounting systems were evolving in the scope of their functionality while using technology to make such systems increasingly affordable to smaller enterprises. By the 1990s, the development of relational databases, the graphical user interface (GUI), more sophisticated event-driven programming languages and widespread adoption of personal computers brought about ERP systems that could bring together a wider set of functions and business processes while offering greater flexibility in how individual enterprises could design and manage their operations. The arrival of ERP systems coincided with management consultants’ focus on “business process reengineering,” which could be assisted with implementing an ERP system. The widespread adoption of ERP resulted in a general flattening of organizational structures as fewer middle managers were required to operate effectively. Cloud-based ERP systems began to emerge in the 2000s with the near-total adoption of the internet in most developed countries. Adoption of these systems was initially slow, partly because the cost, operational complexity and risks of changing ERP software means that enterprises replace them only when absolutely necessary. Our research has found that the average age of a system is seven years, suggesting a replacement cycle well over a decade. Services businesses have been faster to move their ERP system to the cloud because product-based companies typically need to more heavily customize their software to support their operations. However, the tide has turned as most companies look to replace their on-premises software. We assert that by 2027, over 80% of ERP systems purchased by non-product companies will be deployed in the cloud to promote continuity, improve performance and lower costs. While their fundamental organization remains largely unchanged, modern ERP systems now boast enhanced functional depth, usability, adaptability and manageability, particularly in cloud-based environments that are easier to maintain. Over the past two decades, continuous refinement and development tailored to specific industries have increased their utility and decreased overall ownership costs, particularly in implementation and maintenance. Foundational technologies and architecture have also evolved, allowing greater customization capabilities in shared (multi-tenant) computing environments while allowing ongoing development of the core software. Providers offer software development kits (SDKs) to allow third parties to apply their subject matter expertise to extend the capabilities of their system. Application programming interfaces (APIs) allow for easier and reliable integration of different software categories. Current technology trends will revolutionize ERP systems. Innovations such as artificial intelligence (AI), generative AI (GenAI), natural language processing (NLP), agents and agentic devices promise to transform how individuals and enterprises work with the software. Change is already underway. Some straightforward, low risk features such as anomaly detection to flag potential errors are already in place. Technology will make even complex processes faster and easier to execute, and some tasks will be largely or completely automated by agents. AI will condense highly repetitive accounting and other tasks through automation to address the need for greater administrative staff productivity and enable enterprises to attract and retain the best talent. We assert that by 2027, almost all providers of ERP software will have incorporated AI to reduce workloads and speed processes and reduce errors. When considering modernization or replacement of existing ERP software, it is crucial to understand how a new system can complement current capabilities and how to effectively manage the resulting organizational changes. The decision to replace a core ERP system is challenging due to associated costs and potential disruptions. Yet, executives—especially the CFO—must also recognize how outdated systems pose risks to the continued smooth operation of the enterprise. It is also essential to recognize that the capabilities and supporting technology of these systems have evolved slowly but significantly over time. The shift from on-premises to cloud-based ERP continues to accelerate, driven by improved configurability and customization options for specific industries. Terms like “configuration” and “customization” define how systems can adapt to user needs without altering the core code. Moreover, executives must recognize the need for a strategic approach to assessing the software rather than a simple like-for-like replacement. This is especially true in assessing the AI direction of providers. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Midsize ERP excludes providers that derive more than two-thirds of their total software revenue from customers with more than 1,000 employees and that meet our inclusion criteria. The assessment focuses on offerings designed for product and manufacturing enterprises. Our evaluation is based on a comprehensive review of accounting and financial management capabilities. These include basic accounting functionality, including how technology is used to enhance productivity, consolidation and intercompany management, indirect tax, compliance, risk management, inventory, fixed asset, order-to-cash, procure-to-pay and investment in the offering. The guide also assesses the software’s ability to support manufacturing and product-centric enterprises. This includes manufacturing operations, advanced planning and scheduling, demand planning, manufacturing execution, shop floor management, material flow optimization, multi-site operations, quality management, facilities and equipment maintenance, warranty management, environmental, smart manufacturing and distribution. AI-enabled features and functions are part of the evaluation. This research evaluates the following software providers that offer products that address key elements of midsize ERP as we define it: Abas, Acumatica, Aptean, Epicor, Exact, IFS, Infor, Microsoft, Oracle NetSuite, QAD, Ramco, Rockwell Automation, Sage X3 and SAP Business One. Buyers Guide Overview For over two decades, ISG Research has conducted market research in a spectrum of areas across business applications, tools and technologies. We have designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of the business requirements in any enterprise. Utilization of our research methodology and decades of experience enables our Buyers Guide to be an effective method to assess and select software providers and products. The findings of this research undertaking contribute to our comprehensive approach to rating software providers in a manner that is based on the assessments completed by an enterprise. ISG Research has designed the Buyers Guide to provide a balanced perspective of software providers and products that is rooted in an understanding of business requirements in any enterprise. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Midsize ERP is the distillation of over a year of market and product research efforts. It is an assessment of how well software providers’ offerings address enterprises’ requirements for ERP software. The index is structured to support a request for information (RFI) that could be used in the request for proposal (RFP) process by incorporating all criteria needed to evaluate, select, utilize and maintain relationships with software providers. An effective product and customer experience with a provider can ensure the best long-term relationship and value achieved from a resource and financial investment. In this Buyers Guide, ISG Research evaluates the software in seven key categories that are weighted to reflect buyers’ needs based on our expertise and research. Five are product-experience related: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability, and Usability. In addition, we consider two customer-experience categories: Validation, and Total Cost of Ownership/Return on Investment (TCO/ROI). To assess functionality, one of the components of Capability, we applied the ISG Research Value Index methodology and blueprint, which links the personas and processes for ERP to a midsize enterprise’s requirements. The structure of the research reflects our understanding that the effective evaluation of software providers and products involves far more than just examining product features, potential revenue or customers generated from a provider’s marketing and sales efforts. We believe it is important to take a comprehensive, research-based approach, since making the wrong choice of midsize ERP technology can raise the total cost of ownership, lower the return on investment and hamper an enterprise’s ability to reach its full performance potential. In addition, this approach can reduce the project’s development and deployment time and eliminate the risk of relying on a short list of software providers that does not represent a best fit for your enterprise. ISG Research believes that an objective review of software providers and products is a critical business strategy for the adoption and implementation of ERP software and applications. An enterprise’s review should include a thorough analysis of both what is possible and what is relevant. We urge midsize enterprises to do a thorough job of evaluating ERP systems and tools and offer this Buyers Guide as both the results of our in-depth analysis of these providers and as an evaluation methodology. How To Use This Buyers Guide Evaluating Software Providers: The Process We recommend using the Buyers Guide to assess and evaluate new or existing software providers for your enterprise. The market research can be used as an evaluation framework to establish a formal request for information from providers on products and customer experience and will shorten the cycle time when creating an RFI. The steps listed below provide a process that can facilitate best possible outcomes. Define the business case and goals. Define the mission and business case for investment and the expected outcomes from your organizational and technology efforts. Specify the business needs. Defining the business requirements helps identify what specific capabilities are required with respect to people, processes, information and technology. Assess the required roles and responsibilities. Identify the individuals required for success at every level of the organization from executives to front line workers and determine the needs of each. Outline the project’s critical path. What needs to be done, in what order and who will do it? This outline should make clear the prior dependencies at each step of the project plan. Ascertain the technology approach. Determine the business and technology approach that most closely aligns to your organization’s requirements. Establish technology vendor evaluation criteria. Utilize the product experience: Adaptability, Capability, Manageability, Reliability and Usability, and the customer experience in TCO/ROI and Validation. Evaluate and select the technology properly. Weight the categories in the technology evaluation criteria to reflect your organization’s priorities to determine the short list of vendors and products. Establish the business initiative team to start the project. Identify who will lead the project and the members of the team needed to plan and execute it with timelines, priorities and resources. The Findings All of the products we evaluated are feature-rich, but not all the capabilities offered by a software provider are equally valuable to types of workers or support everything needed to manage products on a continuous basis. Moreover, the existence of too many capabilities may be a negative factor for an enterprise if it introduces unnecessary complexity. Nonetheless, you may decide that a larger number of features in the product is a plus, especially if some of them match your enterprise’s established practices or support an initiative that is driving the purchase of new software. Factors beyond features and functions or software provider assessments may become a deciding factor. For example, an enterprise may face budget constraints such that the TCO evaluation can tip the balance to one provider or another. This is where the Value Index methodology and the appropriate category weighting can be applied to determine the best fit of software providers and products to your specific needs. Overall Scoring of Software Providers Across Categories The research finds Infor atop the list, followed by IFS and Epicor. Companies that place in the top three of a category earn the designation of Leader. Infor has done so in six categories; IFS, Oracle NetSuite, Sage X3 and SAP Business One in three; and Acumatica, Epicor and QAD in one category. The overall representation of the research below places the rating of the Product Experience and Customer Experience on the x and y axes, respectively, to provide a visual representation and classification of the software providers. Those providers whose Product Experience have a higher weighted performance to the axis in aggregate of the five product categories place farther to the right, while the performance and weighting for the two Customer Experience categories determines placement on the vertical axis. In short, software providers that place closer to the upper-right on this chart performed better than those closer to the lower-left. The research places software providers into one of four overall categories: Assurance, Exemplary, Merit or Innovative. This representation classifies providers’ overall weighted performance. Exemplary: The categorization and placement of software providers in Exemplary (upper right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product and Customer Experience requirements. The providers rated Exemplary are: Acumatica, IFS, Infor, Sage X3 and SAP Business One. Innovative: The categorization and placement of software providers in Innovative (lower right) represent those that performed the best in meeting the overall Product Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of requirements in Customer Experience. The providers rated Innovative are: Epicor and Microsoft. Assurance: The categorization and placement of software providers in Assurance (upper left) represent those that achieved the highest levels in the overall Customer Experience requirements but did not achieve the highest levels of Product Experience. The providers rated Assurance are: Oracle NetSuite and QAD. Merit: The categorization of software providers in Merit (lower left) represents those that did not exceed the median of performance in Customer or Product Experience or surpass the threshold for the other three categories. The providers rated Merit are: Abas, Aptean, Exact, Ramco and Rockwell Automation. We warn that close provider placement proximity should not be taken to imply that the packages evaluated are functionally identical or equally well suited for use by every enterprise or for a specific process. Although there is a high degree of commonality in how enterprises handle midsize ERP, there are many idiosyncrasies and differences in how they do these functions that can make one software provider’s offering a better fit than another’s for a particular enterprise’s needs. We advise enterprises to assess and evaluate software providers based on organizational requirements and use this research as a supplement to internal evaluation of a provider and products. Product Experience The process of researching products to address an enterprise’s needs should be comprehensive. Our Value Index methodology examines Product Experience and how it aligns with an enterprise’s life cycle of onboarding, configuration, operations, usage and maintenance. Too often, software providers are not evaluated for the entirety of the product; instead, they are evaluated on market execution and vision of the future, which are flawed since they do not represent an enterprise’s requirements but how the provider operates. As more software providers orient to a complete product experience, evaluations will be more robust. The research results in Product Experience are ranked at 80%, or four-fifths, of the overall rating using the specific underlying weighted category performance. Importance was placed on the categories as follows: Usability (15%), Capability (25%), Reliability (10%), Adaptability (10%) and Manageability (20%). This weighting impacted the resulting overall ratings in this research. Infor, IFS and Epicor were designated Product Experience Leaders. While not Leaders, Microsoft and SAP Business One were also found to meet a broad range of enterprise product experience requirements. Customer Experience The importance of a customer relationship with a software provider is essential to the actual success of the products and technology. The advancement of the Customer Experience and the entire life cycle an enterprise has with its software provider is critical for ensuring satisfaction in working with that provider. Technology providers that have chief customer officers are more likely to have greater investments in the customer relationship and focus more on their success. These leaders also need to take responsibility for ensuring this commitment is made abundantly clear on the website and in the buying process and customer journey. The research results in Customer Experience are ranked at 20%, or one-fifth, using the specific underlying weighted category performance as it relates to the framework of commitment and value to the software provider-customer relationship. The two evaluation categories are Validation (10%) and TCO/ROI (10%), which are weighted to represent their importance to the overall research. The software providers that evaluated the highest overall in the aggregated and weighted Customer Experience categories are Oracle NetSuite, Infor and Sage X3. These category Leaders best communicate commitment and dedication to customer needs. While not Leaders, SAP Business One and QAD were also found to meet a broad range of enterprise customer experience requirements. Software providers that did not perform well in this category were unable to provide sufficient customer case studies to demonstrate success or articulate their commitment to customer experience and an enterprise’s journey. The selection of a software provider means a continuous investment by the enterprise, so a holistic evaluation must include examination of how they support the customer experience. Appendix: Software Provider Inclusion For inclusion in the ISG Buyers Guide™ for Midsize ERP in 2024, a software provider must be in good standing financially and ethically, have at least $40 million in annual or projected revenue verified using independent sources, operate across at least two countries, and have at least 50 customers. The principal source of the relevant business unit’s revenue must be software-related, and there must have been at least one major software release in the last 12 months. The ISG Buyers Guide™ for Midsize ERP excludes providers that derive more than two-thirds of their total software revenue from customers with more than 1,000 employees and that meet our inclusion criteria. The research is designed to be independent of the specifics of software provider packaging and pricing. To represent the real-world environment in which businesses operate, we include providers that offer suites or packages of products that may include relevant individual modules or applications. If a software provider is actively marketing, selling and developing a product for the general market and it is reflected on the provider’s website that the product is within the scope of the research, that provider is automatically evaluated for inclusion. All software providers that offer relevant midsize ERP products and meet the inclusion requirements were invited to participate in the evaluation process at no cost to them. Software providers that meet our inclusion criteria but did not completely participate in our Buyers Guide were assessed solely on publicly available information. As this could have a significant impact on classification and ratings, we recommend additional scrutiny when evaluating those providers. Products Evaluated Provider Product Names Version Release Month/Year Abas Abas ERP Cloud Edition V.2024 October 2024 Acumatica Acumatica ERP v. 2024 R2 October 2024 Aptean Aptean Industrial Manufacturing ERP Made2Manage Edition October 2024 Epicor Epicor Kinetic v.2024.2 Fall 2024 Exact Exact Globe+ Online Product Update 502 July 2024 IFS IFS Cloud v. 24R2 October 2024 Infor Infor CloudSuite ERP v.2024 October 2024 Microsoft Microsoft Dynamics 365 v. Release Wave 2 October 2024 Oracle NetSuite Oracle Fusion Cloud ERP Update 24C July 2024 QAD QAD Adaptive ERP v.2024 August 2024 Ramco Ramco ERP v.2024 October 2024 Rockwell Automation Plex ERP v.2024 October 2024 Sage X3 Sage X3 v. 2024 R1 (12.0.35) April 2024 SAP Business One SAP Business One 10 v. FP 2208 June 2024 Providers of Promise We did not include software providers that, as a result of our research and analysis, did not satisfy the criteria for inclusion in this Buyers Guide. These are listed below as “Providers of Promise.” Provider Product Good Standing Revenue Geography Customers Priority Software Priority ERP Yes No Yes Yes Rootstock Cloud ERP for Salesforce Yes No Yes Yes Syspro Syspro Cloud ERP Yes No Yes Yes