 EAM Showdown: IFS vs. Mincom vs. CHAMPS
I'm Sadat Zaman , senior research analyst at Technology Evaluation Centers. Welcome to another enterprise software showdown. Today's Showdown features IFS vs. Mincom vs. CHAMPS, as three popular enterprise asset management (EAM) vendors go up against each other head-to-head! We hope you find this Showdown helpful and informative, and invite your comments and questions at showdown@technologyevaluation.com. |
 |
|
| Introduction |
|
An enterprise asset management (EAM) system tracks an organizations physical assetsits plant, capital equipment, vehicles, and facilities. It keeps track of life cycle and maintenance schedules, allowing for the phasing out of old equipment and the purchase of new equipment. It also tracks mobile assets such as fleet vehicles, and computer and communications equipment, reducing loss and maintaining equipment reliability. After all, the machinery you use to manufacture your products has to be reliable, the electricity must flow, your computers must remain online, and your delivery trucks must be operational. If just one of these assets breaks down unexpectedly, your operations may be interruptedand this can impact your bottom line.
We selected two integrated EAM solutions, Mincom and IFS, and one best-of-breed EAM solution, CHAMPS. Integrated solutions combine core EAM functionality with human resources (HR) and financials (back office), thereby providing a complete solution. On the other hand, best-of-breed provides only core EAM functionality, allowing an organization to retain its installed HR and financials software, as many organizations prefer. | |
Using our Evaluation Center, we compared Mincom Ellipse, CHAMPS, and IFS head-on. For the overall rankings, we looked at the vendors in the two basic configurations discussed above: with back-office (HR and financials) functionality, for a total of eight main modules, and without, for a total of six main modules.
To eliminate any chance of bias, and to ensure a level playing field, all 3,146 criteria comprising the modules and submodules in the EAM request for information (RFI) were given equal weight and priority. In other words, no area of functionality was treated as being more important than any other.
Please note that all the results in this report are based on the most recent RFI data supplied to us by the three vendors, indicating their level of support for each of the 3,146 functional criteria in our EAM Evaluation Center.
EAM Overall Rankings with HR and Financials (Back Office)
EAM Overall Rankings without HR and Financials (Back Office)
Results
The two charts above show the overall rankings.
With back-office functionality (HR and financials) included, IFS finished first, followed by Mincom in the number two slot, with CHAMPS considerably back of the pack in third place. Without back-office modules, IFS finished first again, but this time CHAMPS moves right up to a close second-place finish, with Mincom coming in third.
Clearly CHAMPS, the best-of-breed solution, shows weaker in the rankings that include back-office functionality, since this vendor offers only rudimentary HR and financials. However, for many organizations, this is actually desirable, as they prefer to retain their current back-office system when implementing a new EAM solution. The rankings without back-office modules constitute a true apples-to-apples comparison of pure EAM functionality.
As the charts below show, with back-office features included, IFS and CHAMPS each finished first in three of the main modules, with Mincom finishing first in two modules. Without back-office functionality, CHAMPS again finished first in three of the main modules, with IFS placing first in two main modules, and Mincom finishing first in one main module.
EAM Main Modules with HR and Financials (Back Office)
EAM Main Modules without HR and Financials (Back Office)
But, given that were looking at enterprise software solutions, its not that simple or clear-cut. Rankings, either overall or by module, do not tell you everything you need to know. What they do provide is a basic, high-level view of vendors general strengths and weaknesses. However, the fact is, no two businesses will use an EAM solutions in the exact same way. Businesses have unique requirements that need to be supported by the EAM solution they are implementing.
For example, although IFS placed first overall, Mincom was strongest in the reliability module. If functional areas such as inspections, hand-held support, trigger and alarms, and asset and work identification (all part of the reliability module) are vital to your organization, then Mincom may be a better choice for you than IFS.
Maintenance Management Module
The same applies within individual modules, where the top-ranking vendor may not necessarily be the right one for your organizations needs. Although IFS placed first in maintenance management, CHAMPS was stronger in preventative maintenance and equipment history, as shown in the chart below. If your organization has a large vehicle fleet, or a substantial inventory of capital equipment, CHAMPS may therefore be a better choice than IFS.
Conclusion
Given that out of the box rankings generally dont reflect the real-world needs of an organization, and that the rankings can shift depending on what area of functionality you look at, how then do you determine which EAM solution is best-suited for your business?
The fastest, simplest way is to do what we did to produce the results you see here: Use TECs Evaluation Center. We got our results in twenty minutes, versus weeks or even months of struggling with huge Excel spreadsheets.
TECs EAM evaluation center allows you to set priorities that reflect your organizations business model and special needs at every level of functionality. At the modular and sub-modular levels, even down to the individual criteria, you can tell the system which business processes are critical, important, or not important to your organization. The system then compares your priorities against the vendor responses to produce a shortlist of solutions. You get a custom comparison, one that ranks vendor solutions not on out-of-the-box functionality, but rather on how well that functionality matches the business requirements of your organization.
Its the best way we know of to evaluate EAM solutions, and we invite you to give it a run-through. Simply click on the link below to visit our EAM Evaluation Center to conduct your fast, free custom EAM comparison. After all, theres no other organization quite like yours.
For a free custom comparison of EAM solutions, click below.
Find out which EAM solutions are best suited to your companys particular requirements and type of business.
