White Papers Is It Time to Replace Your E/CTRM? - Page 3

A ComTechAdvisory Whitepaper Is It Time to Replace Your E/CTRM? TECHNOLOGY Many legacy E/CTRMs were developed on old client/server technologies now being withdrawn by their supplier, like Power Builder, for example. Support for these technologies is no longer available and the skills to support them in the market have more or less dried up and become very expensive, meaning it is now often imperative to migrate to newer technologies. This means it is now essential to undertake a re-implementation of a new E/CTRM. As cloud and Software as a Service have begun to emerge as the chosen adoption models, many businesses now want their critical systems delivered that way and seek cloud-native solutions or at least solutions that can be deployed in the cloud. Even those that prefer on-premises delivery seek more modern technologies for greater flexibility and business agility like web-enabled and graphical user interfaces, for example. applications that are highly complex and convoluted sets of code. They are difficult to maintain both for the vendor and the user and do not provide the needed agility nor ease of use. Most newer vendors over the last decade or more have adopted more open architectures or even developed ecosystems of application or modules to allow better ease of support and increased business agility. Given the changes taking place in commodities and the frequency at which they are taking place, architecture has also become important. Many legacy platforms are essentially monolithic M&A AND THE VENDOR LANDSCAPE There has been M&A activity for many years in the E/CTRM software category but in recent years, that activity has seen several of the larger and most prominent solutions in the space fall under a single owner. Not unexpectedly, there is some discomfort in parts of the industry at this and a suspicion that there is increased risk around proper support, marketing and sales of the acquired software products primarily due to an earlier acquisition which saw high staff turnover and a model of charging premium fees. Others simply do not like the idea of a potential monopoly and for some of the earlier acquired platforms, replacements are seemingly already underway. However, other large vendors have run into trouble as well with ageing platforms that have been acquired at some point in the past and they have demonstrated a lack of ability to properly migrate them forward in terms © Commodity Technology Advisory LLC, 2020, All Rights Reserved. 3