If a sales organization creates a great incentive compensation plan, but the sales team fails to execute it efficiently, is it still great? Companies often go through an entire process of assessing the current incentive compensation plan and adjusting it or creating a new one to align with the latest strategic needs. But they often rush into rolling out the changes without a clear compensation plan communication, which is key to the overall success of their sales compensation program.

When you announce a new sales compensation plan to salespeople, do they ask the following questions?

• Why is this new plan better than the old one?
• What’s in it for me?
• Why should we bother to go through changes (again)?

You’re not alone. But salespeople aren’t trying to make your life hard; it’s natural for them to wonder about changes that affect their daily activities and compensation. And it’s in the best interest of the sales organization to meet these questions with the right answers, at the right time.

Communicating a compensation plan is not only a necessity, but an opportunity to get salespeople on board, to motivate them, and to make sure the organization will accomplish its goals. You already have an eager audience, as salespeople will always be interested when it comes to sales compensation management. So how should you go about communicating a compensation plan in the most effective way?

Here are some tips for clear compensation plan communication:

1. Be clear on the “what,” and offer examples

What do sales reps need to achieve to be successful? Create compensation plan scenarios to help them better understand how the plan works and more clearly envision the behaviors that the organization expects of them.

Sales reps are people who want to see and hear, not read and study documentation. Use examples, create rich visualizations, and present the plan in person.

2. Show the “how” of compensation 

Explain the process behind the creation of the new incentive compensation plan, including details about the feedback you gathered from stakeholders, the assessment you made of the old plan, and the business objectives and market trends you took into account. Also, mention the people who participated in the plan creation process, as involving respected team members helps validate the plan.

Reps may not always like a new plan, but you can increase acceptance by eliminating any perception that it came from a mysterious compensation black box.

3. Explain the “why” behind changes 

Salespeople can execute adequately enough without fully grasping the reasoning behind changes. But understanding the big picture helps them move forward without losing sight of where they’re headed, and why. Nobody wants them to get lost along the way. To truly motivate your sales force, provide them with insight into the thinking behind the new plan.

4. Think like your audience

Salespeople depend on the sales compensation plan for their livelihood. Make sure that reps understand how the new plan can help them achieve the best results. In this way, leaders show true empathy for their staff while leaning into the plan to turn business objectives into reality.

5. Have a dialogue

Communication is not a one-way street. To ensure your reps understand their compensation plan, gather feedback and questions. Train managers to answer any queries with interest and authenticity, and schedule one-on-one meetings with reps who feel shaky about the change. Also, provide a path to escalate problems and misunderstanding.

6. Keep communication channels open

Gather feedback constantly, and make sure reps feel confident along the way. Hold managers accountable for how well reps understand and execute the plan, as they play a crucial role in carrying out your compensation plan communication strategy.

Above all, make sure compensation plan communication is not an afterthought, but a well-planned process. Prepare documentation in advance and train the leaders and managers to thoughtfully deliver the message to the sales force. When communicated clearly, a great sales compensation plan sets the stage for top sales performance.

Learn how the Optymyze solution for Sales Commission Management helps organizations like yours effectively communicate new or updated sales commission plans to their salesforce.

Check out solution sheet

Market and internal changes trigger frequent updates to territory assignments. When mishandled, territory adjustments become labor-intensive, leading to lower productivity and territory imbalance – a costly problem regardless of the size and scope of the company. 

Ideally, sales organizations will run and compare various alignment scenarios that capture customer count, demographics, location, and other factors when planning territory adjustments. The process should ensure that reps are placed in territories with the most potential and that sales leaders make good use of their time and skills, basing their decisions on hard facts, not guesswork. Without a sound process, however, territory adjustment can be a bumpy ride. When adjustments are made after quotas and compensation have been planned for the period, impacting pay and managerial expectations, that ride can get even more precarious.

Some common challenges are:

1. Making timely adjustments to territory alignments

Often triggered by change, whether it be externally driven by new trends and market directions, or internal – as in the case of new hires, product changes, and the typical sales turnover (sounds familiar, right?), the need for adjustment can be unpredictable.

For example, a Sales Manager may decide – based on new market research – that mid-size pharma companies should also be targeted in EMEA. But hiring salespeople for those accounts is a lengthy process. To make sure he seizes the opportunity before his competitors, he might decide to adjust territories for five of his reps and split EMEA between them.

2. Using manual processes

Manual processes, still in use by many companies, can result in damagingly slow response times. With questionable results. Moving reps from one account to another, and splitting or collapsing territories, is often prone to errors and second-guessing. To reap the full benefits of territory management, these decisions should only be made after careful consideration.

In addition to deciding which changes should trigger a territory adjustment, sales leaders face another challenge:

3. Allowing time for changes to become effective

Happily, leaders can distract themselves from the problem of waiting by trying to crack a different tough nut: communicating changes and ensuring their adoption. But… we all know that sales reps come and go faster than a toupee in a hurricane. Without an efficient territory adjustment process and automated communication, chaos can ensue.

So how do you address these challenges?

The answer lies in data-driven territory adjustments:

The right time and place

Speaking of reps, they’re not more likely to enjoy constant change than anybody else, so be cautious about making territory adjustments too frequently. And make sure each one is truly necessary. Whether you propose new alignments based on external or internal triggers, do your research before implementing them in the field. In some cases (M&As, for instance, or major changes to product strategy), you might need to return to territory modeling and planning with these new critical factors in mind.

It’s all in the data

Ever notice how some sales managers brag about making decisions based on gut instinct? Sometimes, they seem uniquely gifted, even heroic. Stop right there. Before you let this type of thinking deepen doubts you may already have about your own intuitive skills, keep in mind that territory management is much more a science than an art. You’ll know it in your heart won’t help you create an efficient territory adjustment process. Rather, know it in your data. Look at metrics such as workload balance, number of accounts, customer segmentation, sales rep location, lead distribution, revenue, and revenue potential to pinpoint unbalanced territories and make gentle or sweeping course corrections.

Also, tap into best practices for support. Years of experience in the field have shown us that changes to one or more of the following variables often necessitate territory adjustments:

1. sales rep performance
2. sales rep turnover
3. salesforce size strategy
4. market structure
5. competition
6. customer demographics

Figure out the WHOs

For a successful territory adjustment process, managers and analysts need to answer more than the “WHEN” questions. They need to answer the “WHO” questions as well. Who, for instance, is entitled to propose and evaluate adjustments? When adjustments go live without having been evaluated and approved by someone with a holistic vision of all the pieces that constitute sales performance management, reps may end up in situations that eat away at their motivation and spur territory infighting and confusion.

Make sure you have a clear process in place, as well as advanced capabilities that help you track, approve and communicate changes. Enabling technologies should also account for exceptional scenarios, such as those that led to the revocation of any given user’s rights to propose or validate adjustments.

Collaborate and be transparent

To ensure optimal territory coverage and prevent the disputes referred to above, sales managers and sales operations need to work collaboratively. Shared visibility into the territory management process increases teamwork and makes the benefits of working together plain. When everyone involved in the process has quick and easy access to status updates, the by-product is immediate awareness of the proposal, approval, or rejection of any given adjustment. They can then react accordingly. And, by extension, effectively.

Analyze impact

Sales ops need to rely on powerful enabling technologies to analyze the potential overall impact of proposed adjustments and to prevent other impactful, simultaneous changes to live data.

Depending on their industry and size, sales organizations need to regularly compare the estimated benefits of proposed adjustments with actual outcomes. A follow-up analysis will help leaders understand whether they made the right decisions.

Some organizations lack the time and expertise necessary to make advanced analyses and ensure successful territory adjustments. To address their needs, the Optymyze solution for Sales Territory Management simplifies and automates the entire process. Learn now.

Check out solution sheet

Imagine if, during your typical workweek, you had to deal with rejection throughout the day. Imagine hearing dozens of “noes” and yet picking yourself up every time with a big smile on your face and a new dose of enthusiasm. That’s tough. You may wonder what keeps them going forward. How do they maintain their energy and optimism? The answer is motivation. And motivation comes with proper sales compensation.

Sales compensation is a powerful tool when it comes to influencing sales behavior and improving sales performance. But for most companies, designing an incentive compensation plan that motivates the sales force and spurs specific behaviors is a major concern. As it should be: Nothing matches the power with which sales compensation inspires sales performance. Peak Sales Recruiting’s 2019 Sales Compensation Study found that only 25% of respondents were satisfied with their compensation, while 39% were neutral and 30% dissatisfied – and dissatisfaction can result in losing top competitors to competitors.

So, how can you design incentive compensation plans that will keep your sales force motivated and continually push them to reach new heights?

1. Align sales reps’ targets to company goals

Aligning your goals for the sales team with company objectives is paramount when building a plan that works for everyone. What is the organization’s most pressing current need? Acquiring new customers? Customer retention? Profitability? New product distribution?

If acquiring new customers tops your company’s agenda, design a plan that rewards signing new clients. Similarly, if all eyes are on launching a new product, consider introducing a sales commission or bonus opportunity to reward sales reps specifically for their contribution to a successful launch.

But no matter what your organization’s immediate focus, ensure your incentive compensation plan is easily adaptable. In order to stay relevant and keep your business growing, changes to the plan, whether strategic or structural, must be easy to implement. When corporate or market changes hit, or a merger or acquisition requires unexpected adjustments on everyone’s part, you’re going to need that built-in flexibility. If sales leaders are able to make quick modifications to the plan and by extension drive specific selling behaviors towards achieving new goals, the entire organization gains agility and flexibility.

2. Find the optimal pay mix

There’s no question that money is the most powerful motivator for reps. Whether you want to entice successful salespeople to join your company or ensure that your top sellers don’t leave, you need an incentive compensation plan that is at or above the market.

Once you decide how much each rep will be paid in total, you need to determine the right mix of base salary and commission. In your plan, the ratio between base pay and commission may differ from rep to rep: An experienced salesperson, for instance, might demand a higher percentage in base salary, while a rep who’s just starting his career may be willing to work almost exclusively on commission.

3. Set fair and achievable goals

When incentive compensation plans base rewards on sales goals that are almost impossible to achieve, reps get frustrated and lose motivation. The best incentive compensation plans challenge salespeople while at the same time rewarding them for meeting reasonable target levels.

4. Keep the incentive compensation plan simple

Plans that are written in legalese or weave in an abundance of unnecessary components may well backfire. This is due to the simple fact that they may not be understood, and therefore result in reps reverting to methods that may have worked just as planned to achieve previous goals but bear little relation to current company objectives. Say, for instance, that your company has recently launched a new product. The compensation plan has been redesigned to incentivize reps to sell it, but most of your salespeople have such a hard time deciphering the message, they just continue to focus on selling the old products. The result: Everyone loses money, and the launch goes nowhere.

On the contrary, well-written incentive compensation plans clearly indicate the company’s goals, the outcomes that will be rewarded, and the exact amount of money salespeople will receive for meeting targets. Your reps will spend less time worrying, and more time selling.

In addition to facilitating compensation plan communication that’s direct and accessible, a sales performance management (SPM) solution can make life easier for both leaders and the sales force. A solid SPM solution will not only provide reps with the opportunity to ask questions but will also, when necessary, allow them to quickly convey compensation issues to administrators. Equally important, access to commission registers and reports will enable them to answer their own questions by viewing and drilling down into results. When implemented correctly, an SPM solution improves sales satisfaction and serves to motivate your team.

5. Make timely payments

If you want your plan to induce specific desired behaviors, you need to make it effective as soon as you know the objectives your company is striving to meet. When your salespeople achieve their target, they should be rewarded immediately, and when they fail to meet their goals, the loss should be reflected in their paycheck.

For a sales rep, every workday has its difficulties, and rejection is just one of them. But knowing the challenges salespeople experience and the incentives that drive their best performance will help you build a strategy that infuses your team with the confidence and motivation it needs in order to achieve sales success.

Looking for a sales commission system? Learn how the Optymyze solution for Sales Commission Management simplifies and automates the incentive compensation management process, yielding outcomes beyond expectations.

Check out solution sheet

Looking for a Sales Performance Management (SPM) solution? As with any large enterprise purchase, you are probably getting ready to embark on a procurement journey, the better part of which represents the traditional Request for Proposal (RFP) process. If you think it’s an efficient, effective way to find the best SPM solution, you are likely mistaken.

What’s wrong with RFPs?

Traditional RFPs are Dead on Arrival (DOA)

Now, the purpose of an RFP is, indeed, to provide an organized and efficient way for the buying group and the stakeholders to learn about the options available and to make an informed selection. However, as you’ll soon discover, the traditional RFP approach defeats this purpose.

And here is why – the traditional RFP is:

1. Time-consuming. An RFP process can last more than seven months from start to finish. Add-in contracting and solution deployment time, and more than a year and a half can go by before even realizing any outcomes. Was that the original intent? To spend more than a year to realize benefits?
   
2. RFP requirements gathering. When putting together the RFP requirements, buying companies do not always have the internal expertise to ask the right questions (sometimes uncomfortable questions). They often rely on analyst reports that fail to recommend crucial functionality or to focus on integral processes. Or they have a fixed and restrictive idea of what the solution should do. For these reasons, RFP content is often incomplete or misses the point.
   
3. Resource-intensive. Gathering requirements, engaging with analysts, contacting vendors, reviewing submissions, and then meeting with each vendor for demos and POCs is a tedious process. Not to mention, that canned demo you received – couldn’t you have experienced that much earlier in the process for yourself? 
   
4. Inflexible. Technology is evolving fast and by the time the RFP questionnaire is finalized and sent to vendors, new features and innovations might have hit the market – which the questionnaire does not cover. So, the buying team ends up evaluating offerings based on outdated requirements.
   
5. Biased. Let’s face it: Many decision-makers at buying companies typically have their mind made-up before the process even starts. Some provide information “off the record” to their preferred vendor, giving them an advantage over the other suppliers. Even worse, some companies go ahead with the RFP process just to comply with procurement procedures. In the end, those who end up losing are the stakeholders – the people who will be working with the selected solution the most.
   
6. Abstract. In many cases, the buying decision relies heavily on vendor responses – all wrapped up in marketing speak – and their ability to deliver a “demo” (half of which could be vapor) versus the stakeholder’s ability to gain hands-on experience with each offering. Failing to gain hands-on experience, stakeholders do not have a reasonable understanding of what it would be like to work with each solution and vendor daily. So basically, they are deciding about enterprise technology without even knowing what it is like to actually use the software and work with the support.
   
7. Ineffective. Asking vendors to fill out a common-denominator RFP means shoving them all into the same box, which forces them to compete on price AND removes any semblance of innovation and differentiation. Ultimately, this leads to purchasing a half-rate solution or to making a significant compromise on crucial functionality.

In other words, the traditional RFP is DOA!

…And yet, the traditional RFP approach is still being used today

‘Why?’, you may ask. There are quite a few interesting reasons:

• To give Procurement the ability to compare apples-to-apples.

In an apples-to-apples comparison the various vendors end up competing on price, which ultimately translates to “a good deal”, at least in Procurement terms.

But what happens when one vendor is an orange in the apple basket?

The buying group misses out on value, precisely because the “orange” vendor is forced to fill out a common-denominator RFP to fit the “apple” format. As a result, rarely will an orange – wrongly considered an apple – get a real chance to demonstrate its true value.

• “Because it’s an industry standard”.

Industry standards are crucial to the well-functioning of markets and businesses.

But what if the industry standard for RFPs evolved into an effective and efficient process – free from the inefficiencies listed above?

The buying group would benefit from a transparent assessment of each solution they are looking at, a fair comparison based on value, and ultimately, an informed decision on what solution is the best fit for the entire organization, including the people who will be using it daily.

• Companies rely heavily on their relationships with analyst firms – who influence the industry standards!

But what if the buying group does not have internal expertise and also base their RFP requirements on analyst guidelines?

They may be missing out on opportunities as many industry analyst definitions and guidance on RFP requirements are incomplete or misaligned to company needs. Here’s why:

1. They put very little emphasis on data management as being a crucial process for SPM and does not outline the “dirty data” challenges most companies face after signing the contract with certain point solution vendors. Discussions about data management for SPM should be had long before the RFP process even begins, to avoid common change orders and costly implementation delays.
2. They put virtually no emphasis on capabilities that help the buying group to expand and evolve SPM programs. This too represents a great loss for the buying group; discussions about expansion opportunities should be held early on so that they can get an idea of the true value of the solution they are assessing. Do point solution vendors really think needs won’t change in the future?

So what is a good way to effectively assess the true value of an SPM solution?

Glad you asked. The answer is hands-on experience using the actual solution, learning what the solution does, engaging with solution experts on the vendor side on a daily basis for questions and guidance, and exploring the possibilities beyond current needs.

Forget shiny demos and canned RFP responses!  Emulate how you and your colleagues across disciplines would actually use the solution day-to-day.

Any vendor confident in the value of their solution should be more than willing to offer this type of access to the entire group of stakeholders involved in the buying process. So the stakeholders themselves can explore and learn about the solution at their own pace.

Only when all the stakeholders feel confident the solution will make their lives easier, that is when you know you’ve found the right one for your organization.

If you’re evaluating SPM solutions, you may want to look at a comprehensive SPM competitor analysis that takes into consideration all the points above. Get to the essence of the differences between SPM vendors and their solutions and bring more clarity to your assessment.

Check out SPM competitor analysis

This is part 1 of the 3-part “Failure Series” of blogs, where we will take a deep dive into common issues that organizations face when implementing new systems and solutions. The goal is to gain an understanding of why implementations fail, the costs that are associated with failure, and ways to avoid failure altogether. Let’s start with taking a look at why implementations fail.

Failure is something that all people and organizations face at one point or another. It often necessitates learning or growth and enlightens a clearer path to success. That does not mean that failure should be viewed as acceptable. In fact, it should be avoided at all costs, especially when it involves core systems and new implementations.

A recent study by the Standish Group revealed that only 14% of IT projects are purely successful, meaning they are delivered on time, on budget, and with high customer satisfaction and high return on value for the organization. Conversely, 19% of IT projects are utter failures.

There are numerous reasons why implementations fail, and they can vary depending on the uniqueness of an organization, the specific industry it operates in, or just a basic misunderstanding of expectation versus reality. Regardless of the variables, failure can usually be traced back to 3 core reasons: understanding data, required resources, and third party implementation partners. Let’s take a closer look at all 3.

1. Understanding data:

Do I understand my data and is it readily compatible with the new solution?

Organizations are quick to pull the trigger on purchasing solutions without understanding the necessary nuances around their data. Where does it come from? When is it collected? How is it stored? What structure is it in? Are there integration requirements?

These are key elements that need to be known before implementation can begin and should be part of advanced planning that takes place during the browsing or buying process.  Unfortunately, they often get overlooked and when organizations are ready to begin implementing a new solution they purchased, they are abruptly met with issues that stem from the data.

Most commonly, data sources are incompatible with the new solution, the data format doesn’t match the required structure to flow into the new solution, and the many known and/or unknown data feeds prove difficult to reconcile with the new solution.

These and other similar issues delay or derail implementations completely. However, when you take the time to really understand what you have before you even begin looking for what you need, you can easily avoid them.

2. Required resources:

Are the right people available to ensure success?

There is always some degree of a learning curve when implementing a new system as users will need time to adjust to using it. To ensure that they keep timelines, hit deadlines, and continually build on their understanding and knowledge, it is important that these people are aware of their roles in the implementation and what will be required of them during the process.

Old roles do not necessarily translate to new functions. A person with the title of project manager may not have the aptitude to lead the implementation because they do not have the required skills or even time to dedicate. Prior to the kick-off of the implementation, the requirements of the project must be identified, and the right people must be evaluated and matched with their proper functions. When this does not happen, implementations stall.

People without proper knowledge or training get dropped and new people join the process, which results in uneven work and delays the project as the new people get acclimated. These disjointed efforts create gaps in completion or even cause oversights in key elements needed to properly test the solution. The more prevalent these are, the higher the risk of failure and abandonment of the project.

3. Third-party implementation partners:

Who does the implementation – me, my vendor, or a third party?

A key question that organizations often fail to ask when browsing for a new solution is “Who?” Who is going to be doing the implementation?

Some vendors partner with their buyers to do a collaborative implementation, while other vendors make the buyers do it 100% on their own. Conversely, there are also vendors that handle the implementation themselves for an additional cost. But in any scenario, there needs to be a firm understanding of whose responsibility it is.

What some vendors may not disclose is that when they handle implementations, they use third-party resources to do so. These third-party partners do not have the same knowledge of your organization. They are often not a part of the preliminary or planning talks and are simply assigned tasks. Therefore, they do not fully understand the challenges or issues your organization is looking to address with a new solution, and do not properly design the features of the software to align with your desired results.

As identified in #2 above, it is important to know who is involved in the project and what their role is. Managing an internal team is challenging enough but corralling additional people from a third party creates an unnecessary challenge. What we have seen from implementations that follow this path include collapses in communication, uncertainty around who is doing what, missed deadlines, and delayed delivery. This can cause friction, as faith in the project begins to falter and more problems arise than solutions. Many organizations walk away from failed implementations caused by third parties and wish they knew about them before purchasing.

It’s always exciting getting a shiny new toy, and sometimes we are so eager to have something that we don’t do the proper research ahead of time to make sure what we are buying is what we truly need. Understanding our own needs is crucial in ensuring that our expectations are met upon purchase. We should always do research, ask questions, and leave no stone unturned, especially when we are ready to make a large financial commitment that affects not only ourselves but the entirety of our organization. Understanding the reasons many implementations can fail will hopefully help avoid them in the future.

Stay tuned for the next article in this series where we will be looking at how a failed implementation can have serious costs associated with it, beyond just the bottom line.

In the meantime, here are a few examples of how organizations like yours successfully implemented no-code solutions and achieved outcomes beyond expectations.

Check out success stories

The rise of low-code/no-code solutions is speeding up digital transformations across organizations. The low-code platform development market is estimated to grow from USD 13.2 billion in 2020 to USD 45.5 billion in 2025. Moreover, according to Gartner, low-code application platforms will account for 65 percent of all application development by 2024.

Pro tip: While ‘low-code development’ implies that applications can be built with minimal (low) programming, ‘no-code development’ allows users to create or modify applications without any programming knowledge. Today, both concepts are often grouped together in the ‘low-code’ category, but we’ll hear more about ‘no-code development’ as a category in its own right in the coming years.

This will allow non-technical users to use low-code/no-code platforms to build applications while organizations save money on technical expertise and on-site infrastructure. The resulting freed-up time will also allow them to improve the organization’s performance. However, with every new technology come certain risks that need to be managed and controlled to derive the full benefits.

With low-code/no-code solutions, organizations need to pay extra attention to potential risks associated with data security, auditing and compliance, scalability, and ease of use. So here’s what you need to be mindful of while evaluating one:

Data safety and security

One of the main concerns that any organization should have is how safe and secure their data will be. When looking for a low-code/no-code solution, first and foremost, invest time to understand if it is built on a secure platform and whether the vendor complies with data protection regulations. You also need to make sure you understand the vendor’s data backup policies and disaster recovery process in case of data loss or rewriting.

At the same time, you need to investigate how sensitive data will be handled – whether the solution provides the ability to ensure that its users can access only the information they are supposed to see. For example, not all employees working with HR systems need to access salary information pertaining to the entire organization. So access to this type of sensitive data should be limited to certain roles.

As data sensitivity differs from company to company, you need to make sure the solution provides the ability to set up roles and user restrictions as per your organization’s specific needs.

Reliability – know your vendor!

To ensure a successful solution use across the organization, it’s important to evaluate the vendor as well against three key criteria:

• Compliance experience. The vendor you’re considering should be able to work with you to complete your security and legal compliance audits. However, some vendors might not work with client organizations that handle huge amounts of data with stringent control requirements. So be sure to investigate whether the vendor’s experience matches your business needs in this area.

• Reliability. The vendor should be easily accessible and willing to work with you to resolve any issues. A reliable vendor provides quick access to support services and an efficient system to track all the support requests with defined SLAs based on ticket priority.

• Expert guidance. The vendor should be able to guide you in the implementation process. They should also allow you to provide feedback on system constraints and the addition of new features and capabilities.

Solution scalability

Aside from making sure that the low-code/no-code solution can fulfill your current requirements, you also need to investigate whether it’s scalable enough to meet your future needs. So be sure to look into:

• its ability to integrate with your current data sources;
• what amounts of data it can load and process, and at what frequency and speed;
• how new features are determined and how frequently upgrades are done.

Learning curve

Not all low-code/no-code solutions are easy to configure and deploy and may require a longer learning curve. So it’s important you assess the skills needed for implementing and using the solution you’re considering, evaluate them against your resources’ skills, and determine the associated learning curve. The support and guidance provided by the vendor – e.g., user documentation, training sessions, expert services to monitor the solution implementation, best practices, etc. –  are essential in this learning process. So make sure you evaluate the vendor from this perspective as well.

Just because we’re talking ‘low-code/no-code solutions’ doesn’t mean that shopping for one should be a risk-free process. But it shouldn’t be a daunting one either. By paying close attention to the four points above you will go a long way in making the right investment.

The Optymyze unified, no-code platform enables enterprises to solve the challenges posed by siloed systems and succeed at digital transformation. Learn how.

Check out whitepaper