June 16, 2006

The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

by Barry Murphy

Helping Business Thrive On Technology Change

TECH CHOICES

TECH CHOICES
June 16, 2006

Includes a Forrester Wave

The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

Adobe And IBM Lead In Our Lab-Based Product Evaluation
by Barry Murphy with Connie Moore and Lucy Fossner

EXECUT I V E S U M MA RY
Forrester evaluated ve e-forms software vendors across approximately 100 criteria and found that Adobe and IBM are the clear market leaders. Once viewed as a necessary bureaucratic evil, forms are increasingly utilized as a tool to systematically capture data, serve as an interface to a process step, and bridge the paper-digital divide. The drive to replace paper with digital forms led to the emergence of e-forms software that sits at the intersection of data, content, and process. In the last few years, vendor oerings have advanced greatly, with each vendors approach being dierent. Adobe is a Leader, bringing together a user-friendly forms design environment with the ubiquitous Acrobat Reader rich client. IBM is a Leader providing unparalleled XML and digital signature support. Cardi Software and Microsoft are Strong Performers, oering e-forms products appropriate for forms-driven horizontal business processes. And FileNet is a Strong Performer with an e-forms product aimed squarely at integrating forms into enterprise business processes.

TABLE O F CO N T E N TS
2 Paper Elimination First Drove The e-Forms Market . . . 3 . . . But The Real Driver Now Is Process Management And Eciency 5 e-Forms Software Evaluation Overview: Its Not Just About Forms Access 7 Vendors Dierentiate On How They Integrate Forms Into Broader Products 9 Two Vendors Emerge As Leaders In A Mature Market: Adobe And IBM 11 Supplemental Material

N OT E S & R E S O U R C E S
Forrester conducted lab-based evaluations in March 2006 and interviewed ve vendors plus three reference companies for each vendor. Vendors interviewed included: Adobe Systems, Cardi Software, FileNet, IBM, and Microsoft.

Related Research Documents The Forrester Wave: Content-Centric Applications, Q1 2006 March 29, 2006, Tech Choices
Transactional, Business, And Persuasive Content: A Better Way To Look At Enterprise Content December 21, 2005, Market Overview The Forrester Wave: Enterprise Content Management Suites, Q3 2005 October 7, 2005, Tech Choices

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. All rights reserved. Forrester, Forrester Wave, Forresters Ultimate Consumer Panel, WholeView 2, Technographics, and Total Economic Impact are trademarks of Forrester Research, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. Forrester clients may make one attributed copy or slide of each gure contained herein. Additional reproduction is strictly prohibited. For additional reproduction rights and usage information, go to www.forrester.com. Information is based on best available resources. Opinions reect judgment at the time and are subject to change. To purchase reprints of this document, please email [email protected].

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

TARGET AUDIENCE Business process executive, information management executive, IT operations executive PAPER ELIMINATION FIRST DROVE THE e-FORMS MARKET . . . Ask most people what they think of forms and they will likely respond, Ugh! I cant stand them. Chances are this reaction stems from the paper forms that make life complicated, such as tax forms and mortgage applications. Even in the business context, the average worker hates lling out vacation request forms or oce supply requisitions because the process is either too complicated or takes too long. Today, though, companies understand the benets of digitizing paper-intensive, forms-driven processes. Reducing paper (and associated storage and management costs) is but one benet others include:

A better customer experience. Just one look at the work involved in lling out tax forms clearly

demonstrates how much better the user experience is when instead completing the form digitally. Instead of the person spending hours trying to nd out why their math isnt working or worse, hearing from the IRS that their math was wrong the electronic form prompts users if numbers in certain cells do not conform to given rules. The customer experiences less frustration and the IRS spends less time catching and xing errors a true win-win situation (except, of course, you still have to pay taxes).

A more standardized way to capture data. An organization using forms can capture

information that will eventually populate a back-end system. By making the form digital, the organization can incorporate rules in the form to ensure that data entered conforms to criteria ranging from formats (e.g., phone numbers, Social Security numbers) to schemas (e.g., one that matches the schema of the application to which the data will be routed). This saves the organization time both in error correction and in more straight-through processing of data to the applications where it will live.

A reduction in manual data entry. For years, businesses and government agencies utilized

large data entry sta to manually input information from forms into back-end applications. This practice was both costly and inecient from a manpower perspective and fraught with the risk that chances for errors were high. By digitizing forms, organizations are able to eliminate costly data entry headcount (or deploy that headcount to more value-add tasks) and minimize errors by validating data at the point of entry.

June 16, 2006

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

. . . BUT THE REAL DRIVER NOW IS PROCESS MANAGEMENT AND EFFICIENCY As processes become more automated, organizations should think of forms as more than a user interface to capture information from end users. When e-forms rst emerged, the goal was to replicate a paper form on a computer screen. While this requirement is still typical of e-forms projects, its also possible to utilize e-forms functionality in richer interactions with customers creating a dynamic user experience that guides users through the process of lling in information. Beyond the customer experience, e-forms bring eciency and automation to business processes. eforms are rarely used simply as a piece of content that is accessed a later date virtually all forms contain information that is part of a process (or processes) and must be routed appropriately.1 To meet both form presentation and process automation requirements simultaneously, all e-forms products have become XML-based. Utilizing XML as the basic form language allows data to be shared more easily with back-end systems while presented in a exible manner either in browsers or thick clients. For e-forms vendors, XML support is now the only way to get skin in the game; but each vendors approach to XML support diers, and buyers are confused about which approach is best. In the absence of a universally accepted standard, buyers must evaluate how each vendors XML support works within a given IT environment e-Forms Vendors Deliver Benets In Dierent Ways Organizations deploy e-forms to eliminate paper and gain process automation and eciency. But the methodology for delivering that value varies among e-forms vendors. In general, the biggest areas of dierentiation exist in:

XML support. All the products in our evaluation are XML-based, which allows data to be

shared from the forms application to other systems. But each product supports XML schemas (the dening structure of an XML document) dierently. Adobe Systems, IBM, and Microsoft all have form template types that can be dynamically driven by multiple XML schemas. The schemas are synchronized at the client level saving server processing and simplifying the process of getting data back to the application.

IBM utilizes Extensible Forms Description Language (XFDL) as the form templates language. XFDL is a forms design and document processing meta-language that not only dynamically drives forms presentation from multiple schemas but also guarantees that a form does not change from its inception to its receipt. Adobes XML Forms Architecture (XFA) template acts as a container for data capture, presentation, and manipulation rules that apply to any and all form instances created from that template. Microsofts approach is similar InfoPath templates are XSN les. The XSN format is a cabinet (CAB) le format comprised of several discrete parts, including XML schemas, XSLT, Web services denitions, and other parts. Cardi Software and FileNet both employ XML as the underlying language of forms but use server-side synchronization in order to support XML schemas.

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

June 16, 2006

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

Integration to enterprise content management (ECM) environments. Because a form is a

piece of content, it must be managed as such. Forms often represent a transactional record and may have stringent retention requirements. Its important that an e-forms product t with an organizations existing ECM environment, where the versions of a form can be managed and records policies can be applied. Again, each vendor diers here: While all e-forms products could be integrated into just about any ECM environment, Adobe has packaged integration with most leading ECM platforms, followed by Cardi. FileNet, IBM, and Microsoft have their own ECM oerings, and their e-forms products are optimized for their respective ECM platforms.2

Integration to business process management (BPM) environments. The ability to build

processes around a form or include a form in a larger enterprise business process is critical. All the evaluated e-forms products have corporate cousins that are workow or BPM products. Organizations evaluating e-forms products must ensure a good t with any existing or soon-tobe deployed BPM tools.

FileNet P8 eForms is inextricably linked to the FileNet P8 Process Engine, often making it the forms product of choice for existing P8 customers, but also negating the e-forms product as a potential solution for non customers.3 Cardi LiquidOce Forms is a component of the companys LiquidOce product that combines e-forms and BPM. IBM Workplace Forms can be complemented by the companys BPM integration suite. Adobe LiveCycle has a workow component, as well as Quick Process Action Components (QPACs) that connect to business applications like ERP. And Microsoft InfoPath users can leverage the BPM capabilities of BizTalk and Windows Workow Foundation.

Forms design environments. Forms design can be a catch-22 on one hand, nontechnical

process owners should be able to quickly create and deploy forms; on the other hand, the design environment should also allow power users to create complex forms applications. Adobe, IBM, and Microsoft oer design environments that are business-user-friendly but also give advanced designers access to IDEs when required (Flex, Eclipse, and Visual Studio, respectively). Cardi oers a business-user-friendly design environment; when advanced development is necessary, there is access to business rules engines partners or a code view where developers can handcode more advanced forms. FileNets design environment is not targeted at business users but rather at graphic designers who create forms for business analysts, who in turn access forms via the P8 Workplace client but cannot modify or create the forms.

Forms access methods. Adobe is the hands-down Leader when it comes to distributing forms

to end users. All the products evaluated can broadcast forms via browsers that capability is no longer a dierentiator. However, there are times when a browser simply cannot do what a rich client can, such as enable oine forms lling. The ubiquity (and free price point) of Acrobat Reader means that virtually all possible end users already have an Adobe rich client on

June 16, 2006

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

their machines. An organization can license Reader Extensions to turn on desired functionality within the Acrobat Reader client, such as write access. IBM and Microsoft both oer rich clients to enable functionality like oine forms lling, but neither has the reach of Acrobat. e-FORMS SOFTWARE EVALUATION OVERVIEW: ITS NOT JUST ABOUT FORMS ACCESS To assess the state of the e-forms software market and see how the vendors stack up against each other, Forrester evaluated the strengths and weaknesses of top e-forms software vendors using our Wave methodology. After examining past research, user need assessments, and vendor and expert interviews, we developed a comprehensive set of approximately 100 evaluation criteria, which we grouped into three high-level buckets: strategy, market overview, and current oering (see Figure 1). Evaluated Vendors Handle Forms Projects Ranging From Simple To Complex Forrester included ve vendors in this assessment: Adobe Systems, Cardi Software, FileNet, IBM, and Microsoft. Each of these vendors has:

An e-forms product appropriate for enterprisewide deployments. While there are a number

of niche e-forms solutions available that are aimed at either assisting a specic process like accounts payable or creating forms for a specic application like an ERP system (such as Formscapes solutions for ERP systems), we limited our evaluation to products built for any kind of process or application.

At least 250 enterprise customers using e-forms products. Our evaluation focused on vendors
with proven e-forms success across a large number of enterprise customers.

Advanced e-forms functionality without requiring an OEM partner. Many ECM vendors

have native e-forms capabilities but license a partners e-forms product for advanced forms requirements. To focus on the market leaders, we limited our evaluation to products capable of handling both simple and complex e-forms requirements.

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

June 16, 2006

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

Figure 1 Evaluation Criteria

CURRENT OFFERING Forms design interface Does the product have an interface that allows nonprogrammers to create form templates, including denition of metadata for form presentation, content, structure, and behavior? Can forms be made accessible to users in required formats and managed within a companys IT environment? What options exist for submitting/accepting both electronic and paper forms? Is there support for the common platforms and standards-based architectures that large enterprises need?

Forms deployment (distribution and access) Forms processing (submission/ingestion) Architecture and platform STRATEGY Product strategy Corporate strategy Financial resources to support strategy Cost MARKET PRESENCE Installed base Revenue Revenue growth Systems integrators Services Employees Technology partners

What is the companys strategy for e-forms? What is the companys overall strategy and how do e-forms t into that? Is the vendor protable, and what is the vendors cash ow? Does the company have sucient revenues, prots, and cash ow to support its strategies? What is the cost of this product?

How large is the vendors installed base of customers for this product and for all products? What is the vendors revenue over the past four quarters? What is the vendors year-over-year revenue growth over the past four quarters? How extensive is the companys network of systems integrator partners? How strong are the vendors implementation and training services? How many engineers does the vendor have dedicated to this product? How big is the vendors sales presence? How strongly do technology partners support this product?
Source: Forrester Research, Inc.

June 16, 2006

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

VENDORS DIFFERENTIATE ON HOW THEY INTEGRATE FORMS INTO BROADER PRODUCTS The ve lab-based evaluations uncovered a market in which (see Figure 2):

Adobe and IBM clearly lead the pack. Both vendors oer strong forms design environments
usable by both nontechnical process designers and advanced forms designers, XML support, forms processing (ingestion of paper forms, online submission, and validation), and scalable architectures. Adobe has a slight edge in its current oering with comprehensive forms templates available out of the box, the best dynamic 2D bar code support, and advanced capabilities such as support for 3D images. IBMs strategy, though, is ahead by a hair. Both companies view forms as part of a wider interaction platform, but IBM is spearheading leadership of open standards such as XForms and has a much larger product portfolio for integrating forms applications.4

Cardi Software is a dark horse that could easily play the spoiler. LiquidOce Forms is a

strong product with a business-user-friendly design environment integrated into a broader BPM oering. The products XML support lags behind what Adobe, IBM, and Microsoft oer but is good enough to meet most organizations requirements. The combination of capture (via Cardi s TeleForm product), forms, and BPM makes LiquidOce Forms a good t when organizations need to use forms across broad, horizontal processes.

Microsofts InfoPath is much-improved and enterprise-ready but lacks capture capabilities.

InfoPath 2007 is a signicant upgrade from the 2003 version, now oering a design environment suitable for not only nontechnical process designers (also known as business analysts), but also advanced designers utilizing Visual Studio. What organizations will like most about this new version of InfoPath is that forms can be deployed via HTML in browsers and does not require the InfoPath Viewer unless oine forms lling is a requirement. Another benet is the ability to easily turn other oce documents in Word, Excel, or Access into InfoPath forms. InfoPath still does not have native capture built in, nor any partnerships in place for this when paper forms submissions are a requirement, buyers will have to look beyond InfoPath.

FileNet has a strong product for customers, but must play catch-up for broader appeal.

FileNet P8 eForms oers functionality that will appeal to customers already using the P8 suite. FileNets leading ECM and BPM oerings are well integrated with forms, allowing customers to apply the companys excellent records management capabilities to forms and to easily place forms into business processes. FileNet also applies event management to e-forms, kicking o business processes when changes are made to the forms. But, if not already using P8, most potential customers will nd P8 eForms unsuitable for their needs. FileNet is working to make P8 eForms a stronger standalone product, but it still needs to bring certain functionality up to snu, such as the ability of nontechnical business analysts to create and/or modify forms.

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

June 16, 2006

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

This evaluation of the e-forms software market is intended to be a starting point only. Readers are encouraged to view detailed product evaluations and adapt the criteria weightings to t their individual needs through the Forrester Wave Excel-based vendor comparison tool.
Figure 2 Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 06
Risky Bets
Strong
Adobe Systems IBM Cardi Software Microsoft
Go online to download the Forrester Wave tool for more detailed product evaluations, feature comparisons, and customizable rankings.

Contenders

Strong Performers

Leaders

FileNet

Current oering

Market presence

Weak

Weak

Strategy

Strong
Source: Forrester Research, Inc.

June 16, 2006

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

Figure 2 Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 06 (Cont.)

Cardi Software Adobe Systems

Forresters Weighting

CURRENT OFFERING Forms design interface Forms deployment (distribution and access) Forms processing (submission/ingestion) Architecture and platform STRATEGY Product strategy Corporate strategy Financial resources to support strategy Cost MARKET PRESENCE Installed base Revenue Revenue growth Systems integrators Services Employees Technology partners

25% 30% 20% 25%

4.57 4.80 4.61 5.00 3.94 4.04 4.00 4.15 4.00 3.00 4.10 4.50 4.00 3.00 5.00 4.25 4.00 2.50

3.58 3.25 3.30 4.90 3.20 3.41 3.00 4.85 2.00 5.00 3.10 4.40 2.00 3.00 3.00 2.75 2.00 4.00

3.47 3.00 3.32 4.90 2.98 2.27 2.15 2.45 3.00 2.00 2.99 3.40 3.00 2.00 2.00 4.25 2.40 2.50

4.42 4.40 3.88 5.00 4.61 4.15 4.70 2.45 5.00 4.00 4.03 3.90 5.00 0.00 5.00 4.50 4.20 4.00

3.32 4.00 3.54 2.20 3.29 3.27 3.85 1.30 5.00 5.00 4.46 4.60 5.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 2.50

70% 25% 5% 0%

30% 30% 10% 10% 10% 5% 5%

All scores are based on a scale of 0 (weak) to 5 (strong).

Source: Forrester Research, Inc.

TWO VENDORS EMERGE AS LEADERS IN A MATURE MARKET: ADOBE AND IBM Leaders

Adobe Systems. By combining a strong forms design environment, forms management and

process capabilities, and good XML support with the ubiquitous Acrobat Reader rich client, Adobe LiveCycle is a Leader in the e-forms software market. LiveCycles design environment is business-user-friendly and includes the most comprehensive set of form templates. LiveCycles advanced capabilities are industry leading 2D bar code support and 3D graphics capabilities are built into the product. Adding up all the capabilities, Adobe LiveCycle is a good t for most any type of e-forms deployment, especially when the forms are widely deployed to end users.5 IBM. IBM Workplace Forms is a Leader in the e-forms software market with especially strong XML support and digital signature capabilities. The product oers a business-userfriendly design environment, deployment options of both HTML and a rich client to enable

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

Microsoft
June 16, 2006

FileNet

IBM

10

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

functionality like oine forms lling, and a very scalable architecture. While the product does give users the ability to add workow to forms, more built-in process management would be nice. IBM leads the XForms movement and is working to create an open standard for separating form content and presentation. The products support for digital signatures is market leading and makes it a good t when such requirements loom large.6 Strong Performers

Cardi Software. Cardi s LiquidOce Forms is a strong performer in the e-forms software

market with a business-user-friendly design environment, strong forms processing capabilities, complementary BPM functionality for building forms-driven processes, and fair XML support. LiquidOce forms are distributed almost exclusively via HTML in a browser, meaning the product does not support some advanced capabilities like oine forms lling. An attractive entry-level price and competitive functionality, though, make LiquidOce Forms a strong alternative to more expensive oerings when organizations require a forms solution for horizontal processes.7

Microsoft. The ability to easily turn Oce documents in formats such as Word or Excel into

InfoPath Forms and render them via HTML in a browser makes Microsofts InfoPath a strong performer in the e-forms software market. InfoPath oers a design environment appropriate for both nontechnical process owners and advanced forms designers, good XML support, and fair security protocols. However, the product does not include any paper forms capture capabilities and is architected for Microsoft-centric IT environments. When the full-blown Oce 2007 product suite hits this October, users will nd the vastly improved InfoPath a good t when forms requirements center on quickly deploying forms for horizontal processes.8

FileNet. FileNet P8 eForms is a strong performer in the e-forms software marketplace. The

product is most suitable for existing P8 customers that want to integrate and leverage forms with FileNets strong BPM capabilities. P8 eForms design environment is for graphic designers only business users cannot create or modify forms; rather, they access the forms in the P8 Workplace client for use within business processes. The products form management and processing capabilities are strong, and FileNet provides a scalable architecture. Despite elements of strong functionality, FileNet must work to make the product a better standalone oering before it can be highly competitive with other e-forms oerings.9

June 16, 2006

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

11

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Online Resource The online version of Figure 2 is an Excel-based vendor comparison tool that provides detailed product evaluations and customizable rankings. Data Sources Used In This Forrester Wave Forrester used a combination of data sources to assess the strengths and weaknesses of each solution:

Hands-on lab evaluations. Vendors spent one day with a team of analysts who performed a Strategy and product road map briengs. We asked vendors to provide briengs on

hands-on evaluation of the product using a scenario-based testing methodology. We evaluated each product with an eye to how the product enabled each of the 100 criteria.

their business strategy which could include, among other things, plans for new product development, acquisitions, capitalization, market expansion, sales channels, and partnerships. We also asked each vendor to provide an in-depth product road map for the next 12 to 18 months.

Customer reference calls. To validate product and vendor qualications, Forrester also
conducted reference calls with three of each vendors current customers. The Forrester Wave Methodology We conduct primary research to develop a list of vendors that meet our criteria to be evaluated in this market. From that initial pool of vendors, we then narrow our nal list. We choose these vendors based on: 1) product t; 2) customer success; and 3) Forrester client demand. We eliminate vendors that have limited customer references and products that dont t the scope of our evaluation. After examining past research, user need assessments, and vendor and expert interviews, we develop the initial evaluation criteria. To evaluate the vendors and their products against our set of criteria, we gather details of product qualications through a combination of lab evaluations, questionnaires, demos, and/or discussions with client references. We send evaluations to the vendors for their review, and we adjust the evaluations to provide the most accurate view of vendor oerings and strategies. We set default weightings to reect our analysis of the needs of large user companies and/or other scenarios as outlined in the Forrester Wave document and then score the vendors based on a clearly dened scale. These default weightings are intended only as a starting point, and readers are encouraged to adapt the weightings to t their individual needs through the Excel-based tool. The nal scores generate the graphical depiction of the market based on current oering, strategy, and

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

June 16, 2006

12

Tech Choices | The Forrester Wave: e-Forms Software, Q2 2006

market presence. Forrester intends to update vendor evaluations regularly as product capabilities and vendor strategies evolve. ENDNOTES
1

While it is rare that forms only exist as a static transactional record, the form itself is a piece of transactional content and must be managed as such. See the December 21, 2005, Market Overview Transactional, Business, And Persuasive Content: A Better Way To Look At Enterprise Content. Many ECM vendors oer some e-forms capabilities natively within their products suites. See the October 7, 2005, Tech Choices The Forrester Wave: Enterprise Content Management Suites, Q3 2005. FileNets BPMS product was rated a Strong Performer in our evaluation of human-centric business process management suites. See the February 24, 2006, Tech Choices FileNets BPMS Is Unbeatable At The Intersection Of Content And Processes. Interaction platforms combine rich clients, multichannel business processes, composite applications, collaboration, and other capabilities to ensure consistent user experiences across multiple channels. See the January 31, 2006, Trends The Interaction Platform: Widespread In 2006. View the vendor summary for more detailed analysis on how Adobe Systems fared in this evaluation. See the June 16, 2006, Tech Choices Adobe LiveCycle: An e-Forms Leader Combining Strong Forms Design With Ubiquitous Access. View the vendor summary for more detailed analysis on how IBM fared in this evaluation. See the June 16, 2006, Tech Choices IBM WorkPlace Forms: An e-Forms Leader Targeting Secure Forms. View the vendor summary for more detailed analysis on how Cardi Software fared in this evaluation. See the June 16, 2006, Tech Choices Cardi Software: A Strong Performer In e-Forms Uniting Capture, Forms, And Process. View the vendor summary for more detailed analysis on how Microsoft fared in this evaluation. See the June 16, 2006, Tech Choices Microsoft InfoPath: A Strong Performer In e-Forms Leveraging MS Oce. View the vendor summary for more detailed analysis on how FileNet fared in this evaluation. See the June 16, 2006, Tech Choices FileNet P8 eForms: A Strong Performer In e-Forms With A Focus On BPM.

June 16, 2006

2006, Forrester Research, Inc. Reproduction Prohibited

H e l p i n g B u s i n e s s T h r i v e O n Te c h n o l o g y C h a n g e
Headquarters Forrester Research, Inc. 400 Technology Square Cambridge, MA 02139 USA Tel: +1 617/613-6000 Fax: +1 617/613-5000 Email: [email protected] Nasdaq symbol: FORR www.forrester.com Research and Sales Oces Australia Brazil Canada Denmark France Germany Hong Kong India For a complete list of worldwide locations, visit www.forrester.com/about. For information on hard-copy or electronic reprints, please contact the Client Resource Center at +1 866/367-7378, +1 617/617-5730, or [email protected]. We oer quantity discounts and special pricing for academic and nonprot institutions. Israel Japan Korea The Netherlands Switzerland United Kingdom United States

Forrester Research (Nasdaq: FORR) is an independent technology and market research company that provides pragmatic and forwardthinking advice about technologys impact on business and consumers. For 22 years, Forrester has been a thought leader and trusted advisor, helping global clients lead in their markets through its research, consulting, events, and peer-topeer executive programs. For more information, visit www.forrester.com.

38874