Adobe InDesign CS: ROI and Migration Strategies. Analyzing the ROI of switching to Adobe InDesign CS

Transcription

1 Pfeiffer Report Strategic Analysis Adobe InDesign CS: ROI and Migration Strategies Analyzing the ROI of switching to Adobe InDesign CS A maturing publishing environment Major Findings Adobe InDesign has been on the market for over 4 years, and a lot has changed since the first version of the program was released. Mac OS X has in the process of taking over as the most widely used operating system in publishing, digital photography is in the process of changing image workflows, and high-speed local area networks have become technically and economically viable. In parallel, InDesign has evolved considerably since the first release. Currently available in its third major update (InDesign CS, part of the Adobe Creative Suite, is also version 3.0 of the page layout program), it has already had an enormous impact on the market, and many of its innovations have become widely requested features expected from a mature page layout environment. QuarkXPress, on the other hand has also undergone several releases, and is now available in version 6.1, running natively on Mac OS X. For technology managers in design and publishing, the new release of the most widely used page layout tool on the market changes the situation significantly: in the past the choice was between QuarkXPress in the role of the nimble application offering speed and low hardware requirements, and InDesign which offered strong creative features but required a powerful computer to perform adequately. Today, we are looking at a level playing field: both QuarkXPress 6.x and InDesign CS only run on Mac OS X and Windows (InDesign 2.0 also supported Mac OS 9), and both have comparable hardware requirements. In other words, more than ever, return on investment (ROI) and productivity will be key distinguishing factors when considering both applications. About this report This study is based on an international market research project conducted by Pfeiffer Consulting for Adobe Systems. It also includes in-depth technology analysis and productivity measures. Benchmarks were based on real-world design and publishing assignments and used the Pfeiffer Consulting Methodology for Productivity Benchmarking. (See Methodology on page 3 for more details.) This publication is accompanied by several other reports that analyze the technology strategy, ROI, and productivity results of working with InDesign CS and the Adobe Creative Suite. For an in-depth discussion of the benchmark procedures, detailed results of all benchmarks and productivity measures, and hardware profiles of the computers used for benchmarking, please download the full «Adobe InDesign CS Productivity Benchmark Report» from our Web site at Migration to Adobe InDesign has accelerated in the past two years. All of the InDesign sites interviewed for this research report high levels of satisfaction with their move. Productivity increases over traditional workflows are significant, often resulting in increased ROI. Integration with other Adobe applications plus innovative functionality built into InDesign CS, are key factors in high ROI. The cumulative impact of individual productivity increases may provide a ROI of several thousand dollars per workstation over traditional workflows. About Pfeiffer Consulting Pfeiffer Consulting is an independent technology research institute and consulting operation focused on the needs of publishing, digital content production, and new media professionals. For more information on Pfeiffer Consulting s reports and services please visit or contact us at research@pfeifferreport.com Pfeiffer Consulting Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 1

2 Market Trends in Design and Publishing Major Points An increasing number of magazine publishers and advertising agencies are moving towards large-scale adoption of InDesign. Sites who have migrated to InDesign give the program high marks. Page layout operators who have moved from a QuarkXPress workflow to an InDesign workflow report high levels of satisfaction. Where is the publishing market going? Two years ago, shortly after the release of InDesign 2.0, Pfeiffer Consulting conducted a market research study similar to the project underlying the present document (also on behalf of Adobe). Conditions in the publishing market at the time differed significantly from current conditions. Both InDesign 2.0 and QuarkXPress 5.0 had just shipped. Mac OS X was beginning to take off but few technology managers had made the switch. In short, most of the respondents in the research project were contemplating upcoming challenges but had not tackled them yet. The market clearly had an interest in the innovative features in Adobe InDesign 2.0, but few large companies had gone beyond pilot projects or isolated migration projects. Two years later the changes are tangible. Mac OS X is finally being adopted on a large scale by publishing companies. QuarkXPress 6.0 has been shipping since the summer of And Adobe has introduced the Adobe Creative Suite, which includes InDesign CS, and brings a new more integrated workflow to design and publishing. Few doubt that InDesign offers a viable alternative to QuarkXPress based workflows. Furthermore, the market has moved well beyond pilot projects that offer real-world validation of the program in a production workflow. Companies are now using InDesign for full-scale production work. The Impact of InDesign on Publishing Workflows Sites that have moved to InDesign give the program high marks: asked to rate their satisfaction from 1 (not satisfied at all) to 5 (completely satisfied), every respondent gave it a 4 or 5. Half of the respondents also rated the migration as less difficult than expected. (Chart on the left). One of the key perceived benefits of the move to InDesign is better integration with other Adobe software: 82% of the respondents rated it a 4 or 5. (Chart on the right) Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 2

3 Methodology This report is based on international market research and market-specific productivity benchmarks conducted by Pfeiffer Consulting for Adobe Systems Inc. It also includes elements from independent research and technology analysis projects conducted by Pfeiffer Consulting. Market Research Methodology Nature of research: The research consisted of qualitative research interviews with IT decision makers in advertising agencies and publishers in the United States and Europe. The research included companies working with QuarkXPress based workflows, as well as companies that have already moved to InDesign. Geographic reach: The research was conducted with respondents from the USA, Britain, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Finland and Australia. A total of 65 respondents participated in the project. The majority of interviews were conducted on-site. Productivity Measures In parallel to the market research project, Pfeiffer Consulting conducted extensive, market-specific productivity benchmarks. Nature of benchmarks: Experienced professionals performed segment-specific design assignments, defined in clearly repeatable steps and executed in a closely monitored way. The benchmarks covered a variety of workflow-related productivity measures as well as market-specific design and publishing assignments. Additional benchmarks measured the impact of specific InDesign functionality on overall productivity in publishing workflows. To ensure real-world results, no scripting was used for any benchmarks. For an in-depth discussion of the benchmark methodology, comprehensive benchmark data, and systems configurations, please download the complete benchmark report at Who has moved to InDesign? The research project conducted for this report covered publishing houses and advertising agencies in the USA and Europe, and it shows a growing trend towards migration to InDesign. The majority of magazine publishers interviewed are in the middle of this process. Most of them expressed the intention of converting all of their QuarkXPress seats over time to InDesign. Of the magazine publishers interviewed, most have already migrated several magazines and are in the process of converting others: Condé Nast and Hearstaffiliate National Magazine Publishing are in this process, as is Gruner+Jahr s French subsidiary Prisma Presse. Others have long completed their transition, as is the case of ACP in Australia. Several major advertising agencies in the USA and Europe are also in the middle of largescale migration to InDesign. Who is staying with QuarkXPress? A number of companies interviewed for this research have decided to stay with QuarkXPress for now. Companies who are leaning this way include IDG, Reader s Digest, and National Geographic, as well as the Bonnier Magazine Publishing Group in Sweden. Some publications are interested in InDesign but do not find they need the technological advances the program has to offer. Others such as Time Inc. are watching the market but are not ready to make a commitment. It is striking, however, that InDesign gets high marks from the sites who have adopted it. All of the respondents who have managed transitions to InDesign rated their degree of satisfaction as 4 or 5 out of 5, and 50% of the respondents said the migration process was less difficult than expected. This an important point: for most technology managers in larger corporations one of the major barriers to adoption of InDesign is the anticipated complexity of migration. It is also quite clear from the research that the battles for mind-and market share are far from over. While none of the sites that have adopted InDesign mentioned any interest in going back to a QuarkXPress based solution, only a few companies have made a similar commitment to QuarkXPress. In other words, a number of sites that are upgrading from earlier versions of QuarkXPress to version 6.x do not rule out InDesign for the future. They see their move to the latest version of QuarkXPress as a way of minimizing the load of transitioning from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X. Market Attitude to InDesign This report was created by Pfeiffer Consulting ( All texts and illustrations Pfeiffer Consulting Charts: Fischer Design. Reproduction prohibited without previous written approval. For further information, please contact research@pfeifferreport.com. The data presented in this rep ort are evaluations and generic simulations and are communicated for informational purposes only. The information is not intended to provide, nor can it replace, specific productivity research and calculations of existing companies or workflow situations. Pfeiffer Consulting declines any responsibility for the use or course of action undertaken on the basis of any information, advice, or recommendation contained in this report, and cannot be held responsible for purchase, equipment and investment or any other decisions and undertakings based on the data provided in this report or any associated document. Adobe, Acrobat, GoLive, Illustrator, InCopy, InDesign, Photoshop, and Version Cue are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries. Mac and Macintosh are trademarks of Apple Computer, Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. OpenType and Windows are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. One of the key barriers to adoption of InDesign is the fear of a complex technology transition. However, in practice, difficulties appear to be manageable: 50% of the sites that have moved to InDesign say that the process of migration was less difficult than they expected. Only 13% found it more difficult than anticipated. Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 3 Pfeiffer Consulting 2002 Reproduction prohibited without prior written permission.

4 Productivity and Return on Investment Major Points Market-specific productivity measures show a significant increase in productivity with Adobe InDesign CS over QuarkXPress-based workflows. Innovative functionality, better integration with Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator, and better PDF support are key elements of higher productivity. The cumulative impact of individual productivity increases may provide an ROI of several thousand dollars per workstation over traditional workflows. What is return on investment? In many industries, the answers are quite simple, but that s not so in the design and publishing world. Defining ROI for publishers and designers is significantly more complex than simply weighing a financial investment against revenues generated. The complexity starts with defining what the investment is. In the case of moving to Adobe InDesign, some professionals see only the cost of the software licence. Others are concerned about the cost of training. Others yet consider it part of an upgrade to Mac OS X, which is in itself a momentous move. Generally, the bigger the company, the more complex the situation becomes. In smaller design agencies, the main perceived cost is quite often the acquisition of the software designers expect to pick up InDesign as they go, without any need for specific training. Larger agencies, on the other hand, generally perceive the need for a corporate strategy in adopting the new software. Similarly, what constitutes an appreciable return on investment is also very variable. For many design professionals, saving billable hours is not nearly as important as gaining or maintaining the creative edge in a highly competitive market place. While most respondents in this research project agree that their current creative workflows more or less answer their needs for print production, they may assess the situation differently once they lose a client project to a competitor who s using InDesign CS. The Impact of Integrated Functionality on Productivity Not surprisingly, the most spectacular productivity increases with Adobe InDesign CS stem from built-in features that require the use of a separate application or plug-in in other workflows. For example, InDesign CS is consistently faster at exporting PDF files with productivity gains of 40% or more for every PDF generated. (Based on productivity benchmarks conducted by Pfeiffer Consulting. For detailed discussion of the benchmarks and the underlying methodology, please refer to «The Adobe InDesign CS Productivity Benchmark» on Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 4

5 Major Productivity Figures Magazine Spread Time in seconds shorter is better Design Assignment Time in seconds shorter is better 6 min 24 sec InDesign CS XPress 6.x InDesign CS 6 min 29 sec XPress 6.x Total Total 9 min 52 sec 13min 2 sec Pfeiffer Consulting has conducted extensive, market-specific productivity benchmarks, using specially conceived, real-world publishing assignments that were executed in a closely monitored way. The chart on the left shows the overall productivity measures for the magazine publishing productivity benchmark; the chart on the right features the results of the graphic design productivity benchmark. For more information and for detailed results, please see the Adobe InDesign CS Productivity Benchmark Report on Savings through increased productivity The productivity measures conducted for this research project show real productivity gains using Adobe s page layout software: all major test assignments could be completed with InDesign CS in a fraction of the time necessary with QuarkXPress based workflows. Built-in support for frequently used design options such as transparency or drop shadows within the page layout program, as well as better integration with Photoshop and Illustrator, create significant time savings and favor creative experimentation, making art directors less dependent on production departments within the company. Advantages of a streamlined workflow Practically all of the respondents in this research project stated that reducing the number of workflow steps is an essential goal for them. A majority also said that staying creatively competitive is important. Reducing the number of steps necessary to achieve a desired result has a number of benefits: saving time is the most obvious, but not the only benefit. For a designer or art director, fewer steps to a result means less distraction from his or her creative ideas and more latitude to experiment. Equally important in a production environment, fewer steps reduces the risk of errors. This is particularly true for steps that involve saving files in a different format or with a different name (and sometimes in a different directory). Each one of these operations contains the potential risk of an operator mistake that can be hard to detect and take a long time to correct. Older workflows, however, rely entirely on such a scenario. Working with a Photoshop file in a page layout means that for each change in the source image, the user has to work with two files: the original, multilayered Photoshop document and the TIFF or EPS file used for placement in the page layout document. The result is the risk of file-system related errors. While it is hard to quantify such a risk, the ability to work with native Photoshop and Illustrator files in InDesign can result in significant productivity gains. The InCopy Factor Most publishing workflows do not use an editorial workflow system but rely instead on a standard word processor to write and edit text. Last-minute copy fitting is handled on a page layout workstation. While very common, this way of working has several drawbacks. Standard word processing programs processors have an overwhelming feature set designed to serve a wide variety of needs. Many of these features are useless in publishing. At the same time, word processors lack some basic features that are indispensable for preparing text for a publication. Adobe InCopy was initially conceived to provide system integrators for editorial systems with a copy fitting tool using the same composition engine as InDesign, but the program could not be used as an off-the-shelve component. InCopy CS, on the other hand, which was released at the same time as the Creative Suite can be used alongside InDesign CS without any middleware or software integration. In addition, like all CS programs, InCopy CS supports Version Cue and can be used by any workgroup which would like to add revision tracking and copy fitting to its workflow. Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 5 Pfeiffer Consulting 2002 Reproduction prohibited without prior written permission.

6 InDesign Success Stories Over the past two years, migration to InDesign has accelerated. Of the companies interviewed for this report, 55% already use InDesign in parts of their operation, and many major publishing houses have already migrated a significant portion of their page layout seats. This is the case of Hearst-affiliate National Magazine Company in London, publisher of Harpers&Queens, Esquire, and Cosmo Girl, to name a few of their publications. Almost 300 seats in magazine production have been moved from QuarkXPress to InDesign, and the remaining seats are in the process of migrating. Although motivating individuals to embrace the switch can be an issue, the results speak for themselves. From all the people who have moved to InDesign there is not a single individual who would like to go back to QuarkXPress says Sean Briggs, development manager at National Magazine Company. Briggs was in charge of the migration project. Increased productivity is often a key perceived benefit of the move to InDesign: productivity gains are often rated at 20-30% over previous workflows. Sometimes it can even be much higher. Our designers build pages 2 to 3 times faster in InDesign, says George Mahlberg of Bloomberg Business Publications in New York. Establishing ROI projections Every company is different. Every organization has its own way of evaluating what constitutes a worthwhile investment, and what should be taken into account when evaluating ROI. Generally, to be reliable, ROI figures need to be established for each specific situation. It is nevertheless possible to establish a grid for evaluating the impact of productivity gains on return on investments. Here are our starting points: 1) Better integration with Photoshop and Illustrator yields continuous, quantifiable productivity gains. 2) Built-in support for transparency, nested style sheets, and other key features yields spectacular productivity gains. 3) Integrated functionality allows designers and art directors to create effects such as transparency, thus reducing the work load of the production department. 4) According to the productivity benchmarks conducted for this research, InDesign is up to 3 times more productive in design assignments than QuarkXPress based workflows. 5) Some real benefits of an InDesign based workflow such as unlimited undo and crash protection are hard to quantify but can significantly contribute to increase overall productivity. Some figures Now lets try to translate this into dollars saved. If you are an independent designer charging $100 per hour, every minute you save is worth $1.60. This means that each individual drop shadow under a headline or a graphic object created directly in InDesign (as opposed to using a combination of QuarkXPress and Photoshop) provides an ROI of $2.99. For a senior art director in a major agency paid $ 400 per hour this could be up to $10. Let s take a simple transparency effect, which takes over 2 minutes in an XPress based workflow, and can be achieved in under 18 seconds in InDesign CS: at $100 per hour, the ROI would be $ 3.63 and up to $14 or more in the case of a senior designer. Of course one might argue that an art director would not be doing the work, which would instead be handled by the production department. However, the savings would still be substantial. (It might also be argued that a senior designer would probably experiment with transparency and similar effects a lot more if he or she did not have to go into another program to achieve them.) In many cases, significant return on investment will occur because of a streamlined workflow. The productivity measures show that each roundtrip from the page layout software into Photoshop for editing a native file saves roughly 30 seconds. If a designer saves just 6 minutes a day this way for 20 workdays a month, it means that at the end of one month, the tighter integration of InDesign with Photoshop alone has saved two hours, or at least $200 (calculated at $100 per hour). If a production department relies on these exchanges intensely, savings can be impressive just for this one feature. Likewise, based on our productivity benchmarks, exporting a single PDF file in InDesign can generate $1.19 at an hourly rate of $100. The main return on investment, however, will be in the cumulative effect of the different productivity gains, which could easily amount to thousands of dollars per year as the table on the next page shows. That these productivity gains are real is confirmed by many of the sites we interviewed that have moved to InDesign. Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 6

7 Assignment-based productivity gains and savings Calculating Return on Investment Scenarios (per Workstation) Productivity measures for QuarkXPress 6.x (Time in seconds) Productivity measures for Adobe InDesign CS (Time in seconds) Time saved over QuarkXPress workflow (Time in seconds) Main magazine productivity assignment % $5.77 $11.53 $17.30 $23.06 Productivity gain (%) (1 $100) $200) $300) (1 $400) Main design productivity assignment % $11.00 $22.01 $33.01 $44.01 Everyday design operations % $2.60 $5.21 $7.81 $10.42 Incremental productivity gains (Return on Investment generated by individual operation) Import images % $0.13 $0.27 $0.40 $0.54 Roundtrip native Photoshop file 20MB % $0.72 $1.44 $2.16 $2.88 Roundtrip native Photoshop file 40MB % $0.91 $1.82 $2.73 $3.64 Roundtrip native Photoshop file 80MB % $0.77 $1.54 $2.31 $3.07 Roundtrip native Illustrator file % $0.57 $1.14 $1.71 $2.28 Preview complex spread % $1.01 $2.19 $3.29 $4.39 Simple transparency effect % $3.63 $7.27 $10.90 $14.53 Drop shadow % $2.99 $5.98 $8.97 $11.96 Tables % $0.99 $1.97 $2.96 $3.95 Export PDF % $1.19 $2.39 $3.58 $4.78 ROI projections based on incremental productivity gains Time saved (seconds) Number of occurrences/week $100) $200) $300) Import images $13.47 $26.94 $40.42 $53.89 Roundtrip native Photoshop file 20MB $14.38 $28.77 $43.15 $57.53 Roundtrip native Photoshop file 40MB $9.11 $18.21 $27.32 $36.42 Roundtrip native Photoshop file 80MB $3.84 $7.69 $11.53 $15.37 Roundtrip native Illustrator file $5.69 $11.39 $17.08 $22.78 Preview complex spread $21.93 $43.87 $65.80 $87.73 Simple transparency effect $54.50 $ $ $ Drop shadow $29.91 $59.82 $89.73 $ Tables $4.93 $9.86 $14.80 $19.73 Export PDF $23.89 $47.78 $71.67 $95.56 Total /week $ $ $ $ Total /month $ $1, $2, $2, Total /year $7, $15, $23, $31, ROI projections based on incremental productivity gains Time saved (seconds) Number of occurrences/week (1 $100) (1 $200) (1 $300) (1 $400) Main magazine productivity assignment $28.83 $57.65 $86.48 $ Total /month $ $ $ $ Total /year $1, $2, $3, $5, Main design productivity assignment $55.02 $ $ $ Total /month $ $ $ $ Total /year $2, $4, $7, $9, Everyday design operations $13.02 $26.04 $39.06 $52.08 Total /month $52.08 $ $ $ Total /year $ $1, $1, $2, Adobe InDesign: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 7 Pfeiffer Consulting 2002 Reproduction prohibited without prior written permission.

8 Key Migration Strategies Planning migration The arrival of Adobe InDesign in its particular market situation is unique: in this industry, as in most computer-related professional activities, nobody wishes to swap tools. Even upgrading to a more recent version of the software already in place is usually a complicated and costly affair. However, as our research has underscored, a considerable number of companies in the publishing market, are already moving to InDesign, or are evaluating whether to do so. This move is not easy and requires a lot of questions and research. Exploration phase: Technical viability The first question to solve is technical viability. Pfeiffer Consulting recommends creating a small team of technical experts within a publication to explore the InDesign adoption process. The ideal way is to start with a small publication or a supplement and to recreate the workflow in tandem with existing methods. A major requirement is to stay at a level of productivity comparable to the previous workflow, while implementing methods which closely mimic the production processes already in place. While this is a valid starting point, it is important to realize that this is probably not the best way to achieve the optimal results with InDesign. Some options, that are currently unavailable in QuarkXPress, such as the Adobe Paragraph Composer slow down the operation of InDesign but can provide increased productivity if they are used intelligently. Other features are relatively new to the page layout process and can make a production team more efficient if they are implemented in a coherent way. A good example are layers, which can be activated, hidden and locked individually and can add a new level of structuring to a production process. Major Points The question of changing software platforms for publishing is far reaching and needs a considerable amount of planning. Motivations for such a move need to be clarified and mid-term goals must be clearly defined. Prioritizing needs is a major step. Solving the technological problem of replacing one software solution with another is only the first step. Training is a major hurdle. In some cases, motivating the teams faced with changing their tools is another important step. About file conversion InDesign opens existing QuarkXPress x documents, so it s tempting to start out in InDesign using an existing document. However, for a number of reasons, Pfeiffer Consulting does not recommend using converted files during your exploratory phase. The first reason is the conversion itself: it works reasonably well, but it is not a complete, fool-proof translation. You will probably need to adjust the files to get the result you want. The second reason is the technical evaluation itself: if a problem appears in a converted file during this process, you have no clear way of telling whether the problem was caused by the file conversion itself. Finally, there is one more important reason: while aiming at the same endresult as QuarkXPress, InDesign is different both in its functionality and its user interface. Only if one starts from scratch will it be possible to make the most of the innovative features in InDesign. It s also a good idea to use the move to Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 8

9 Recommendations Migration is a multiple-step process. Do not try to move too fast. Create a small team which has as its mission to experiment with the software and to validate technological choices on the production level. Start with a small publication, or with a small section of a larger project. InDesign as a way to check which work procedures can be streamlined. Trying to emulate a pre-existing workflow can be counterproductive. Finally, the problem of file conversion points back to the human aspect of such a move: experience shows that, once a team is motivated to make a switch, making a new start is perceived as something useful and positive. Motivation really is one of the key elements of any move. Step-by-step migration To sum things up, Pfeiffer Consulting recommends that you treat the migration to InDesign CS as a step by step process: start with the smallest, least complicated publication or document, and move up slowly. Migrating to a new technology platform is always a complex process but if it is planned well, it need not be a traumatic one. Migration Strategies: Critical Path Management of Human Resources Training for Pilot Team Organize Training Create Pilot Team Create Second Team Build Motivation Complete Pilot Project Migrate Second Project Technical Exploration Feasability Assessment Organize Production Management of Technical Resources Validate Production Environment Audit Pilot Project Exploration Pilot Project Migration Apart from putting in place the technical validation process of a software switch, migration necessitates a considerable amount of planning on the human level. Training is essential, but motivation building is also a major part in managing a smooth transition from one tool to another. In many cases, users are attached to their tools (human reaction). It is important that the migration to a new set of tools be prepared for properly by explaining the process and by involving all team members. Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 9 Pfeiffer Consulting 2002 Reproduction prohibited without prior written permission.

10 Pfeiffer Consulting Adobe InDesign CS: Return on Investment and Migration Strategies 10