2014 student information systems market trends report sample

2014Student Information SystemsU.S. Higher Education Market

Share,Trends and Leaders

Report Date: April 2014

By Vicki Tambellini and Mary Beth CahillThe Tambellini Group, LLC

Unauthorized Distribution Prohibited.

SAMPLE

Copyright 2014 The Tambellini Group, LLC All rights reserved.

Contents of Full ReportAcknowledgements .....................................................................................................................................................................1Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................................2TTG Higher Education Market Definition ..............................................................................................................................4U.S. Higher Education Market Overview.................................................................................................................................5Market Trends for SIS 2013 Purchases .....................................................................................................................................6Making a Vendor Selection ......................................................................................................................................................10U.S. Higher Education 2012 Vendor Market Share ..............................................................................................................11SIS Vendor Market Share ..........................................................................................................................................................11SIS Selection by Institution Size ..............................................................................................................................................14SIS Selection by Institution Type .............................................................................................................................................18SIS Total Market Share by Institution Type ...........................................................................................................................21SIS Vendor Trends and Roadmaps ..........................................................................................................................................24

Campus Management Corporation ...................................................................................................................................25Ellucian ..................................................................................................................................................................................28Jenzabar .................................................................................................................................................................................31Oracle.....................................................................................................................................................................................33RJM SONISWEB ..................................................................................................................................................................37Three Rivers Systems ...........................................................................................................................................................39

Companies to Watch in 2014 and Beyond .............................................................................................................................41FAME .....................................................................................................................................................................................42Kuali Foundation .................................................................................................................................................................43UNIT4 Business Software ...................................................................................................................................................45Workday ................................................................................................................................................................................46

U.S. Higher Education Technology: 2014 and Beyond ........................................................................................................51Top Motivators to Evaluate a new SIS .....................................................................................................................................52Appendix ....................................................................................................................................................................................53

List of References ...................................................................................................................................................................53Methodology ..........................................................................................................................................................................54About the Authors .................................................................................................................................................................55About The Tambellini Group, LLC. .....................................................................................................................................56Pricing Information ...............................................................................................................................................................56Other Reports Available ........................................................................................................................................................57Copyright and Terms of Use.................................................................................................................................................58

2014 Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders



1

The authors gratefully acknowledge the editorial contributions of Karen Willett, who reviewed and edited the report in the context of her vast knowledge of the Education Information Technology Profile Database™, technical writing, publishing and education technology. Her edits and insights are appreciated.

The authors would also like to thank each of the software vendors covered in the 2014 report. Every vendor provided detailed information and responsive answers to our questions. Additionally, the software vendors provided feedback for their summary sections to ensure an accurate portrayal of their solutions.

This report would not be possible without the research and support of our staff and analysts. The cover design and creative layout is by Lisa Mott. Every effort is made to provide accurate and timely information. The authors acknowledge that institutions make it possible for us to report our findings by answering our surveys, providing interviews and by publishing their documents online. We thank everyone who has participated in making this major report available.

Acknowledgements

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



2

The U.S. student information systems (SIS) market is showing signs of accelerated change. Institutions are evaluating and re-evaluating administrative systems including SIS for the first time in years, if not decades. Vendors report being overwhelmed with requests for information, demonstrations and new product proposals. Key themes driving 2013 SIS procurements were total cost of ownership, mobile, big data/analytics, student retention/student success, software-as-a-service (SaaS), cloud, security, and social/engagement.

Institutions continue to look for systems to enhance automation and self-service. Managing long-term costs, especially those associated with the SIS and other administrative systems, were key drivers for change. Costs associated with aging systems and systems that have been heavily customized are being targeted for reduction at an accelerated rate. This report is cumulative, providing a detailed overview of the higher education student information systems (SIS) market within the U.S.

The goal of the Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders report series is to convey important research about vendors providing SIS software solutions and services. We provide this information to better inform higher education institutions’ SIS purchasing and implementation decisions. There is a scarce amount of resources dedicated to presenting and analyzing specific SIS vendor selections made by institutions. As a result, institutions must fend for themselves to discern one SIS vendor from another in an industry where it can be challenging to make distinctions between vendors due to similar marketing messages. With that in mind, The Tambellini Group (TTG) founded and designed this series of reports to provide institutions with critical overviews of SIS vendors and selections made by institutions that are not available elsewhere in this level of detail. The report explores a vast and complex set of data, ultimately making it accessible and easier to digest. A summary for each SIS vendor focuses on specific strengths.

Additionally, the report examines the SIS choices higher education institutions have made in recent years in order to illuminate emerging selection patterns. TTG’s extensive research captures the key aspects of the SIS selection process,

including institution type, institution size, systems replaced and SIS add-on solutions. Higher education institutions use this report as a valuable resource to evaluate SIS trends and vendors before making SIS selections. Institutions also use this report to better understand the choices that peer institutions make by institution size and type.

In 2014, TTG’s research includes the addition of vendor implementation partner options where appropriate. While some vendors offer vendor implementation, others prefer to partner with a network of consulting services firms. Institutions are advised to review the vendor implementation approach carefully in light of each institution’s culture and requirements.

This report updates TTG’s 2013 Student Information Systems U.S. Higher Education Market Share, Trends and Leaders report published April 2013. The focus of this report is the 2013 SIS landscape, market share and trends, and a review of SIS vendors selected most often by institutions in the U.S. The SIS data points analyzed in this report are derived from the TTG Education Institution Technology Profile Database™, which is the world’s most comprehensive catalog of over 53,300 education technology selections made by institutions worldwide. The Education Institution Technology Profile Database™ contains validated SIS records for more than 5,400 U.S. higher education institutions, which includes both accredited and non-accredited schools.

Executive Summary

“ In 2013 the majority of purchasing

decisions were made by institutions

that had less than XXXX students,

had requirements for term and

non-term based enrollment and

used partners for implementation.”

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



3

The total size of the Education Institution Technology Profile Database™ exceeds 18,100 global institutions, including categories such as most recent systems selected for human resources, financial systems, learning management systems, CRM, student success, enrollment management, financial aid, advancement/alumni systems, student/faculty/staff email, library systems, and more.

The TTG 2014 SIS Market Trends Report identifies and explores the following major points:• Institutionswithenrollmentsizeoflessthanxxxxstudents

continued to make more SIS decisions in 2013 than anyother institution size range regardless of the institutiontype.

• In2013therewasanoticeableincreaseinthenumberofSIS selections in mid-sized institutions with an enrollmentrange of xxxx to xxxx students.

• TheXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX institutiontypemade moreSIS selections in 2013 than any otherinstitution type.

• Thelargestgrowthsegmentin2013withinthehighereducation market is in xxxxxx institutions.

• Thenumberofprivate,for-profitinstitutionsmakingSIS selections experienced a decrease of xx% in 2013.

• Vendorpreferencesareclearincertainmarketsegments.

Some of the most critical findings in this report include:• HighereducationSISselectionsaretrendingtoward

institutions that have enrollments of less than xxxxstudents.

• TheSISmarketisshowingsignsofgrowthafterbottoming out in xxxx.

• Withtheexpansivegrowthofcontinuingeducation,workforce development programs, and distance learning,the landscape within higher education is shifting awayfrom a primarily traditional learning environment.

• SISandotheradministrativesolutionsforhighereducationare at the beginning of a new technology life-cycle basedon cloud solutions.

• Newcloudsolutionsareemergingandthelandscapewillcontinue to adjust over the next 3-5 years as new solutionsare delivered.

The total number of SIS selections in the U.S. were made up primarily of institutions with less than xxxx students. xxxxxx was awarded more SIS contracts than any other vendor in 2013. xxxxx is the leading vendor in 2013 among all size institutions procuring a new SIS. Each of the vendors is selected for particular strengths by the institutions that prefer their solutions.

Now in its sixth (6th) year, this annual report shows that every year the top group of vendors selected by institutions is made up of a core group of providers. Each year the top vendor for the year is determined more by the number of institutions that make decisions by institution size and type rather than by changes in vendor product or strategy. For example, in 2013 the majority of the decisions were made by institutions that had less than xxxx students, had requirements for term and non-term based enrollment, and used partners for implementation. Many of the institutions were also xxxxxx. xxxxxxxxxxxxxx is most often selected by private, for-profit institutions and easily maintains the position of market share leader in that category.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The body of the report delves further into this research, shedding light on the new product offerings, services, and add-on products and services that have contributed to higher education institutions’ SIS selections of each vendor solution in 2013. Institutions may use this report to more easily determine the vendor SIS solutions most often selected by other, similar institutions. In every segment, higher education institutions demonstrate certain vendor preferences.

Executive Summary (cont.)

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



4

TTG’s definition of the U.S. higher education market includes all accredited and unaccredited postsecondary institutions and schools. The TTG Education Institution Technology Profile Database™ is the world’s most comprehensive catalog of over 18,100 worldwide institutions, including over 10,150 U.S. education institutions. TTG currently has SIS data for more than 5,400 U.S. higher education institutions. Figure 1 shows the percentage of U.S. SIS institutions tracked by TTG by sector of institution.

TTG Higher Education Market Definition

The TTG database includes institutions that are listed in the Higher Education Publications, Inc. Higher Education Directory (HED) and the U.S. Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), as well as institutions that are not included by either of these entities. The HED publishes the list of accredited institutions. IPEDS gathers information from every college, university, and technical and vocational institution that participates in federal student financial aid programs. The Higher Education

Figure 1: Percentage of TTG SIS Institutions by Sector of Institution

Act of 1965, as amended, requires that institutions that participate in federal student aid programs report data on enrollments, program completions, graduation rates, faculty and staff, finances, institutional prices, and student financial aid.

Higher education is in a constant state of transition with ever-changing student expectations. Schools continue to deviate from the traditional learning model typically seen in liberal arts schools to a more unconventional, career-oriented approach that accommodates adult, working, and underserved students. The proliferation of private, for-profit, and less than two-year schools, coupled with changing student needs, have had an impact on the U.S. higher education landscape.

Individuals interested in data from TTG are often reviewing market opportunity, education trends, technology adoption in higher education, and overall issues affecting procurements and investments in technology related to education of all types. As a result, the TTG Education Institution Technology Profile Database™ includes all types of institutions, regardless of size and accreditation status.

In addition to research reports, TTG utilizes research data to inform education executives and to deliver individual institution technology profiles to clients. Executives utilize data to compare peer institution records, to educate boards, trustees, and investors, and to reduce risk. Research is conducted from the perspective of the institution decision-maker and is developed to answer questions such as: Which vendor solutions have my colleagues recently selected? and How many other institutions with my basic institution profile have made the decision that I am considering?

By monitoring the selections made by institutions of all sizes and types, TTG is able to report on details unavailable from any other source. For example, in addition to the selection made by each institution, TTG tracks the vendor replaced and when selections are made. Over time, reports are available to indicate which vendor solution is most often selected when a vendor is replaced. The TTG Education Institution Technology Profile Database™ is updated on a daily basis, so report results and comparisons are subject to change as new information is validated and recorded.

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



5

U.S. Higher Education Market OverviewAccording to the U.S. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) and the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, student enrollment in degree-granting post-secondary institutions experienced minor decreases in both 2012 and 2013, after reaching a record high of 21 million students in 2010-2011. It is estimated that higher education student enrollment decreased by 1.8% in fall 2012 from fall 2011, and 1.5% in fall 2013 from fall 20121. The enrollment decreases are largely attributed to a smaller number of high school graduates after a decade of growth, and a decrease in the number of adult learners who left college because they have gained or re-gained employment.

The institution types largely affected by this year’s decrease in student enrollment are private, for-profit and public, 2-year institutions. According to the National Student Clearinghouse, there are strong indications that traditional private, not-for-profit institutions will begin to contract starting in 2013-2014. Changing higher education student enrollment demographics are being influenced by a decrease in the number of high school graduates, an increase in the number of international students, a continuing trend toward the non-traditional adult learners, and an increase in ethnically diverse students. Looking forward, the NCES projects that total student enrollment in post-secondary institutions will increase by approximately XX% between 2011 and 20212.

TTG research shows that in 2012 the private, for-profit institution segment was the largest institution type making SIS selections, garnering 52% or 76 selections. In 2013 the largest institution type making SIS selections was xxxxxx, xxxxxxxxxxxxxx x-year institutions with xx% market share or xx SIS selections. Public institutions collectively garnered xx% of the SIS selections with xx SIS selections in public two-year institutions and xx SIS selections in public four-year institutions. Public less-than-2-year institutions made xxx SIS selections. According to the National Association of State Budget Officers, state fiscal conditions are modestly improving in fiscal 2014 with spending and revenues projected to rise above fiscal 2013 levels3. This combined with new technology advances is creating opportunities in higher education that will provide institutions with increased productivity and could also contribute to the growth of increased SIS placements.

“ In 2013 the largest

institution type making

SIS selections was xxxxxxx,

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

institutions with xx% or

xx SIS selections.”

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



6

As shown in Table 1 and predicted in the TTG 2013 Market Trends report, the number of SIS procurements in U.S. higher education showed continued growth in 2013, after bottoming out in xxxx. The number of U.S. SIS selections increased xx% in 2013 over 2012. While the increase in 2012 SIS selections was attributed to the growth of the private, for-profit sector, which comprised xx% of the institutions making SIS selections, the 2013 increase is the result of growth

in the private, not-for-profit sector claiming collectively xx% of the SIS selections, and the public sector, claiming xx% of the SIS selections. This was in line with TTG 2013 market predictions. Public institutions were evenly represented in 2013 with public, four-year institutions claiming xxxxxxxx percent and public, two-year institutions claiming xxxxxx percent of the total SIS selections. Public, less-than-two-year institutions accounted for xxxxx percent of the total SIS selections in 2013.

Market Trends for SIS 2013 Purchases

Table 1: Estimated Number of U.S. Institutions Making a New SIS Selection*

The xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx was awarded three large multi-campus contracts that made a significant impact on the SIS annual landscape in 2013. xxxxxx was selected by the xxxxxxxxxxxxxx for Community & Technical Colleges, which is rolling out xxxxxxxxxxxx across xxxxxxxx campuses in the state. xxxxxxx University selected xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for their campus-wide SIS, replacing several disparate student systems in sixteen schools across the institution. In addition, xxxxxxx was awarded a large contract at xxxxxxxxxxxx University, where it will be deployed across xxxxxxxxx campuses.

The institution types that made SIS selections in 2013 differed from those that made selections in previous years. The institutions making SIS selections in 2013 trended more toward traditional learning institutions. In 2013 seventy-five percent of the institutions selecting a SIS were traditional learning institutions, as compared to 2012, with only forty-eight percent. The increase in the number of selections in 2013 by traditional learning institutions represents the beginning of a market rebound predicted by TTG in the 2013 SIS Market Trends report. This also attests to higher education industry reports that show a decrease in student enrollment in private, for-profit institutions in 2013.

In the private, for-profit arena, the majority of schools making SIS selections were less-than-two-year schools, which accounted for xx% of the total 2013 SIS selections. While there was a decrease in the number of xxxxxxx institutions making SIS selections in 2013, non-degree granting, certificate-based programs continue to attract students. The xxxxxxxxxxx sector of higher education has a different student base with different operating procedures, business processes and requirements. This parlays into the notion that a solution that serves the traditional learning market extremely well may not be the best fit for a xxxxxxxxxxxx institution. Since both traditional learning and non-traditional learning institutions may use this report to inform future SIS evaluations, TTG started to provide SIS selection data in greater detail in the 2013 report.

Private, not-for-profit institutions accounted for xx% of the 2013 market share with xxxxxxxx SIS selections. Institutions in this sector included religious-based schools, distance learning schools, and private liberal arts institutions. Private, not-for-profit- four-year and above institutions claimed the largest not-for-profit representation with xx% of the total 2013 SIS selections.

Source: TTG Education Institution Technology Profile Database™

*The 2014 report is based on available 2013 SIS selection data. SIS market data is subject to final verification and updates. The TTG Database contains SIS selection data for approximately1,800 institutions for which the actual purchase year is estimated or unknown. If the purchase date is unknown, the selection is not included for calculating vendor selections in 2013.

Up to 2000xxxxx

2000 – 2003xxx

2004 – 2008xxx

2009xxx

2010xxx

2011xxx

2012xxx

2013xxx

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



7

As depicted in Table 2, U.S. higher education institutions seeking new SIS software continue to favor those schools with enrollments of less than 2,500 students. However, in 2013 there was more activity in mid-tier schools than in the previous four years. In 2012 eighty-two percent of the total SIS selections were made by institutions with enrollments of less than 2,500 students, as compared to 2013 with xxxxxxxx percent. Mid-tier institutions ranging in enrollment size

from 2,500 students to 9,999 students comprised xxxxxxxx percent of the total 2013 SIS selections versus eleven percent in 2012. SIS vendors xxxxxx and xxxxxxxx were selected most often in 2013 by mid-tier institutions with respectively xxxxxxxxxx and xxxxx selections. The number of SIS selections in schools with less than xxxxx students is highly influenced by the xxxxxxxxxx institution type, which tends to average less than xxxxxx students per campus.

Market Trends for SIS 2013 Purchases (cont.)

Table 2: Percentage of U.S. Institutions Selecting Top SIS by Enrollment Size

Student Enrollment

Size

Percentage of Institutions

Making a SIS Selection byEnrollment

Category2009



Category2010

Percentage of InstitutionsMaking a SIS Selection byEnrollment

Category2011


Making a SIS Selection byEnrollment Category

2012



Category2013

<2,500 students xx% xx% xx% xx% xx%

2,500 – 4,999 students xx% xx% xx% xx% xx%



>20,000 students xx% xx% xx% xx% xx%

Unknown xx% xx% xx% xx% xx%

Source: TTG Education Institution Technology Profile Database™

**The 2011 total SIS selections for 2011 have been updated from the 2012 SIS Market Trends report due to new verified data

TTG estimates that x% of all higher education institutions still have homegrown student systems in place. In 2013 xx% of the total SIS purchases were replacements for homegrown systems, versus xx% in 2012. xxxxxx garnered xx% of the homegrown replacements in 2013, followed by xxxxxxxx with xx%.

From a total SIS perspective as shown in Figure 2, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



8

Market Trends for SIS 2013 Purchases (cont.)Figure 2: Comparison of 2013 SIS Placements With and Without Private, For-Profit

Source: TTG Research and Education Institution Technology Profile Database™

Over the last few decades student enrollment in U.S. post-secondary education has increased exponentially. During this time the market for student systems reached a mature state. Up until the last twelve months most vendor SIS product offerings have been primarily centered around on-premise student solutions that have matured into the “laggard” stage of the technology adoption bell curve depicted in Figure 3. A down

economy starting in 2008-2009 and requirements to support non-traditional learning has caused many institutions to re-evaluate how they can use different service models in an effort to respond to reduced budgets and new teaching modalities. Higher education institutions are now actively looking at all types of deployment options that include: on-premise, hosted, managed, SaaS, and a combination thereof.

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



53

Appendix

1.NationalStudentClearinghouseResearchCenter:CurrentTermEnrollmentReport–Fall2013,http://nscresearchcenter.org/currenttermenrollmentestimate-fall2013/

2. NCES: Undergraduate Enrollment, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cha.asp

3. The National Board of State Budget Officers, Fiscal Survey of States, Fall 2013,http://www.nasbo.org/publications-data/fiscal-survey-states/fiscal-survey-states-fall-2013

List of References

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



54

Research data for this report was compiled by TTG and includes vendor sales through December 31, 2013. TTG maintains, updates, and delivers the most comprehensive database of institution technology profiles available. The company began tracking this data in 2001 in response to client requests, and today provides data to global organizations and institutions. TTG gathers and maintains publicly available data on SIS selections from a variety of sources, including press releases, institution materials (i.e. project websites and presentations), news articles, and vendor case studies. TTG conducts primary research including surveys and interviews with institutions. Institutions provide updates to technology profiles through online research portals on various websites.

While other firms have historically provided some information and opinions regarding market trends, the data to support these opinions has typically been provided by vendors minus detailed customer lists or by survey responses, which have limited response rates. Without the benefit of detailed, verified technology profiles, institutions, vendors, consultants and financial analysts were generally left on their own to try and find enough critical technology data to support important decisions. TTG’s Education Institution Technology Profile Database™ is used by institutions to find peers with similar technology implementations, for benchmarking comparisons, and vendor references. Vendors, consultants, financial analysts, investors and venture capitalists also utilize the database to gain insight into market share data and other facts about vendor sales history that are not available from any other single source. Prior to the availability of this database, it was difficult to track and understand market share data by vendor and vendor product. The 2014 report was informed by interviews with the top vendor representatives. TTG thanks the following software

vendors for participating in the research: Campus Management CorporationJenzabarEllucianFAMEKauli FoundationOracleRJM SONISWEBThree Rivers SystemsUNIT4Workday

In every case, vendors provided detailed and helpful updates including product roadmap plans. TTG wishes to especially thank the vendors for taking time to comment on market trends and issues.

TTG also interviewed implementation partners for Oracle and Workday for this report. The list of Oracle implementation partners profiled is a partial list. The list of Workday implementation partners profiled is a complete list. The individual institution profile data is accessible on edu1world.org, which is powered by software from Enterprise Hive, LLC. Since 2008, institutions have been self-reporting purchases and updating their own technology profiles via edu1world.org for easy cataloging and retrieval of information. This is especially helpful for institutions that wish to maintain an inventory of technology purchases without dedicating internal resources for managing data. In April 2014, The Tambellini Group analyzed more than 1,000 responses to a targeted survey to higher education decision makers and buyer/influencers which provided additional information and insight for this report.

Methodology

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



55

Vicki Tambellini is the President and CEO of The Tambellini Group and Enterprise Hive

About the Authors

Vicki Tambellini is the President and CEO of The Tambellini Group and Enterprise Hive. She has over 30 years of experience in executive management, consulting, business operations, and technology leadership in higher education, and in the commercial sector. Her distinguished career includes creating the Education Institution Technology Profile Database™, the world’s most comprehensive catalog of education technology selections by institutions. Enterprise Hive delivers award-winning solutions to help improve communications, collaboration and outcomes for institutions.

Prior to becoming an entrepreneur, Ms. Tambellini was VP and GM of PeopleSoft’s higher education business unit from 1995-1999. Under her direction, the higher

education business unit grew to more than 500 million in revenue and 400 plus customers in four years. Ms. Tambellini also held management positions with Oracle between 1990-1995. For her commitment to education, Ms. Tambellini was awarded an honorary, lifetime, Platinum Learning! Professional Certification by the Elearning! Institute in December 2012. The award was given in recognition of the portfolio of achievements and contributions to the field of learning, as well as for continued commitment to evolve and shape the industry.

Ms. Tambellini received a B.S. in Business from Virginia Commonwealth University.

Mary Beth Cahill is the Vice President of Research for The Tambellini Group, where she focuses on higher education technology trends and software strategies. She has worked with The Tambellini Group since 2005 in various capacities. During this time, Ms. Cahill has participated in and led numerous research efforts specifically in the area of vendor SIS software solutions, data and learning analytics, CRM, learning management, and social networking.

Prior to joining The Tambellini Group, Ms. Cahill had 23 years of experience in the technology industry, most of which

were in public sector and higher education. Ms. Cahill spent nine years as a Senior Technologist with Oracle Corporation, where her focus was software solutions within the public sector. Ms. Cahill has also held technology related positions at Digital Equipment Corporation, Xerox Corporation and Burroughs Corporation.

Ms. Cahill holds a B.S. in Mathematics from the University of Richmond.

Mary Beth Cahill, Vice President of Research for The Tambellini Group, LLC.

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



56

Vendor copies of this report are $3,995. The report is available to institutions, schools, and organizations for the discounted rate of $595.00. The report may be reproduced for unlimited internal distribution. External distribution rights may be available upon request and for an additional fee.

If your institution is planning to select a new SIS, Financial System, Human Resources System, Learning Management System or CRM, and needs to benchmark peer institutions based on type of institution and enrollment size, please contact [email protected] to learn more about how to receive custom reports. Detailed reports with institution names, vendor products selected, and selection dates are available for purchase.

Customized reports for education institutions are priced based on the number of records. Individual records are $6.50 each. The minimum fee for an individual report is $500.00 for higher education institutions.

About The Tambellini Group, LLC.The Tambellini Group (TTG) is the world’s leading research and advisory firm for higher education executives. TTG delivers detailed quantitative and qualitative technology research, insight and analysis specifically for education. TTG enables informed decisions based on data. Executive level skills and services include: strategic advice for executives, market research, contract negotiations with administrative systems technology vendors and service providers, and published thought leadership on business and technology issues. TTG specializes in the education technology sector.

The Tambellini Group is headquartered in Irvington, Virginia, and provides the world’s largest and most complete database on the software, hardware, SaaS, and services selected by education institutions and schools. Clients include institutions, organizations and businesses seeking a deeper understanding of market trends and issues based on verifiable data.

Pricing Information

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



57

Student Information System for U.S. Colleges and Universities by Vendor

Campus Management CampusVue Student

Ellucian Colleague Student

Jenzabar CX

Jenzabar EX

Kuali Student

Oracle PeopleSoft Enterprise Campus Solutions

Populi

Ellucian Banner Student

Ellucian PowerCAMPUS Student

Three Rivers CAMS Enterprise

TopSchool Student Lifecycle Management

Financial Management Systems for U.S. Colleges and Universities by Vendor

Colleges and Universities by Vendor

Campus Management CampusVue Finance

Ellucian Colleague Finance

Jenzabar CX

Jenzabar EX

Kuali Financial Systems

Lawson Enterprise Financial Management

Oracle PeopleSoft Enterprise Financial Management

Ellucian Banner Finance

Ellucian PowerCAMPUS Finance


Human Resources Systems for U.S. Colleges and Universities by Vendor Campus Management CampusVue HR

Ellucian Colleague Human Resources

Jenzabar CX

Jenzabar EX

Oracle PeopleSoft Enterprise HCM

SAP ERP Human Capital Management

Ellucian Banner Human Resources

Ellucian PowerCAMPUS


Learning Management Systems for U.S. Colleges and Universities by Vendor

Blackboard Academic Suite

Blackboard ANGEL Learning Management Suite

Blackboard Learn

Blackboard WebCT Vista

Desire2Learn Learning Environment

Instructure Canvas

Moodle

Moodlerooms

Moodlerooms joule

Pearson eCollege

Pearson LearningStudio

Sakai CLE

WebStudy CMS

Library Managment Systems for U.S. Colleges and Universities by Vendor

Auto-Graphics Agent VERSO

Endeavor Voyager Library System

Ex Libris Voyager

Innovative Interfaces

Millennium ILS

Polaris Library Systems Polaris

SirsiDynix Horizon

The Library Corporation Library Solution

Other Reports AvailablePreconfigured reports such as these may be purchased. Please contact us if you are interested in learning how to receive a copy of these reports.

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE



58

Copyright and Terms of Use This paper is Copyright 2014-2015 by The Tambellini Group, LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this report and strategic analysis may be reproduced, given, lent, resold or disclosed in whole or in part without the written permission of and attribution to The Tambellini Group, LLC. Only the person, institution, school, company or organization that has licensed this report may access and use the report. You many print and use this report inside your institution, school, organization or company as part of an institution, school, organization or company license. You may not distribute this report to others outside of your institution, school, organization or company unless you have specifically licensed the rights to distribute the report for external use.

The Tambellini Group offers no specific guarantee regarding the accuracy or completeness of the information presented, but The Tambellini Group makes every reasonable effort to present the most reliable information available. The Tambellini Group assumes no liability for errors, omissions or discrepancies in the information contained in this report.

The research for this report is not sponsored, and TTG relies on sales of the report for publication. As such, TTG issues each copy of the report to the institution, school, organization or company that licenses it. Copyright violations are therefore enforced to the fullest extent.

Becky

Typewritten Text

SAMPLE PAGE