application feedback 79% program complete

79%Complete

ApplicationFeedbackProgram

Prepared for

Jane SmithTechExpress

of 129

SUITE OFAPPLICATIONS

70%

Overall ApplicationsPortfolio Satisfaction

Overall portfolio satisfaction is anindication of end user sentiment inthe organization overall.

This metric enables the IT leader todetermine at a glance if they aremeeting the needs of the business.

Application PortfolioComponent Satisfaction

Aggregated across all ratedapplications, scores on usability,

features and data quality providean overall indication of the

effectiveness of the applicationsportfolio.

Number of Applicationsby Importance &

Effectiveness

Evaluating the number of applications within eachquadrant is a first step in assessing the health of theoverall portfolio, and in determining whichapplications require immediate action.

68%Usability

--%vs Last Year

69%Features

--%vs Last Year

73%Data Quality

--%vs Last Year

Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal

ExtremelyIneffective

ExtremelyEffectiveEffectiveness

(Features + Usability)

HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

5EFFECTIVE

10UNWANTED

9QUESTIONABLE

9UNLEVERAGED

11

Five Most CriticalApplications

The most critical applicationsto an organization are those

most widely used and rated byusers as very important to

their job. Underperformingapplications in this group

should be an immediate focus.

Applications

Users

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Microsoft Word 2010 124 88% 88% 89% --% Effective

Microsoft Excel 2010 124 82% 87% 87% --% Effective

Internet Explorer 9 104 85% 81% 83% --% Effective

Numara Software Track-It! 119 63% 75% 78% 79% Effective

Microsoft Powerpoint 2010 124 51% 83% 86% --% Effective

Five MostUnderperforming Apps

The most underperformingapplications are those that

have the lowest effectiveness.Improvements to these

underperforming applicationswill have the widest affect on

the organization.

Applications

Users

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Record Sheets 3 0% --% --% --% Unwanted

AZ Loan Desk 3 0% --% --% --% Unwanted

eVision Technologies GroupmediaCAT 2013 1 0% --% --% --% Unwanted

Adobe Photoshop 3 0% --% --% --% Unwanted

Isuzu Motors America, Inc. NDiesel 52 Retail CD 1 1 0% --% --% --% Unwanted

Five Lowest Data QualityApplications

The most data impactedapplications had the lowest

data quality score according toend users. These applications

should be assessed for dataquality immediately.

Applications

Users

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

ELIE Employee Directory 1.0.0 119 47% 56% 63% 55% Questionable

ADEMCO PassPoint Plus 2.1 8 58% 36% 41% 57% Contentious

ActiveNet 75 67% 51% 46% 59% Contentious

Disarea LLC 5pm 1.17 15 80% 51% 57% 61% Contentious

NEOGOV NeoGov 9 33% 64% 64% 63% Questionable

vs Last Year

Applications Overview Application Feedback Program

TechExpress125 Responses

of 129

High Performing ApplicationsEnd Users love these apps. Pat yourself on the back and findways to get more out of 'unleveraged' apps that are unused ornice to have.

Number of Applications by Importance & Effectiveness

Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

5EFFECTIVE

10UNWANTED

9QUESTIONABLE

9UNLEVERAGED

11

At Risk ApplicationsWhile crucial to the business, these apps are underperformingand should be addressed for root cause immediately.


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

5EFFECTIVE

10UNWANTED

9QUESTIONABLE

9UNLEVERAGED

11

Nonessential ApplicationsThese apps bring questionable value proposition to the table.Consider retiring, upgrading or retraining end users on theseapps.


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

5EFFECTIVE

10UNWANTED

9QUESTIONABLE

9UNLEVERAGED

11

Application

Users

Importance

Usability

FeaturesData

Quality

Hemoco Lansweeper 5.1 8 92% 81% 83% 86%

Microsoft Word 2010 124 88% 89% 88% --%

Internet Explorer 9 104 85% 83% 81% --%

Microsoft Excel 2010 124 82% 87% 87% --%

Opsera Opsview Agent 3.9 8 75% 78% 90% --%

AutoDesk AutoCAD 19 12 64% 77% 81% --%

Numara Software Track-It! 119 63% 78% 75% 79%

Adobe Acrobat Professional10 42 60% 83% 76% --%

Microsoft Visio 2010 8 54% 88% 82% --%

Microsoft Powerpoint 2010 124 51% 86% 83% --%

Microsoft Publisher 2010 124 42% 76% 76% --%

Vegetation Database 5 40% 65% 70% 65%

Environmental SystemsResearch Instit... 23 38% 61% 80% 84%

Adobe Adobe Creative Suite6 75 37% 77% 76% --%

Application

Users

Importance

Usability

FeaturesData

Quality

Disarea LLC 5pm 1.17 15 80% 57% 51% 61%

VMware AirWatch 8 71% 56% 53% --%

ActiveNet 75 67% 46% 51% 59%

ADEMCO PassPoint Plus 2.1 8 58% 41% 36% 57%

IBM Cognos Planning OfflineContribut... 3 56% 60% 57% --%

Application

Users

Importance

Usability

FeaturesData

Quality

Nero Essentials 7 3 --% --% --% --%

Brother P-touch 1 --% --% --% --%

IBM M5 1 --% --% --% --%

eVision Technologies GroupmediaCAT 2013 1 --% --% --% --%

APS PocketCitation 3 --% --% --% --%

AZ Loan Desk 3 --% --% --% --%

Adobe Photoshop 3 --% --% --% --%

Record Sheets 3 --% --% --% --%

Isuzu Motors America, Inc. NDiesel 5... 1 --% --% --% --%

Apple iOS 8 3 44% 45% 25% 70%

SALTO Systems USB Device 8 4% 50% 60% --%

TechSmith Snagit 9.1 9 15% 55% 57% --%

Smartfile MPRB FTP Services 119 15% 62% 54% --%

Compu-SOLVE MinuteTraq8.7.6 124 21% 60% 59% 74%



of 129

High Performing ApplicationsEnd Users love these apps. Pat yourself on the back and findways to get more out of 'unleveraged' apps that are unused ornice to have.


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

5EFFECTIVE

10UNWANTED

9QUESTIONABLE

9UNLEVERAGED

11

At Risk ApplicationsWhile crucial to the business, these apps are underperformingand should be addressed for root cause immediately.


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

5EFFECTIVE

10UNWANTED

9QUESTIONABLE

9UNLEVERAGED

11

Nonessential ApplicationsThese apps bring questionable value proposition to the table.Consider retiring, upgrading or retraining end users on theseapps.


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

5EFFECTIVE

10UNWANTED

9QUESTIONABLE

9UNLEVERAGED

11

Application

Users

Importance

Usability

FeaturesData

Quality

Google SketchUp Pro 8 v3 12 28% 90% 80% --%

Forestry 2.5.1.0 3 25% 90% 75% 100%

US EPA StormwaterCalculator 6 11% 60% 80% --%

Isco, Inc. Flowlink 5.1 6 6% 60% 80% 90%

USACE Flux32 Software forLoad Estima... 6 --% 60% 80% --%

USACE Bathtub 6 --% 60% 80% --%

USACE P8 Urban CatchmentModel 3.4 6 --% 60% 80% --%

Application

Users

Importance

Usability

FeaturesData

QualityApplication

Users

Importance

Usability

FeaturesData

Quality

ELIE Employee Directory1.0.0 119 47% 63% 56% 55%

Red Egg Software ieSpell2.5.1 48 10% 65% 61% --%

ADT-Matrix RASplus 1.4.4 51 16% 63% 64% --%

NEOGOV NeoGov 9 33% 64% 64% 63%



of 129


81%11%

Compared toCompany

Department ApplicationPortfolio Satisfaction

Use these metrics to evaluate theoverall satisfaction of thisdepartment with regards to thecollection of applications withwhich it uses to perform its duties.Compare this department’s scoresagainst average satisfaction in theorganization to decide if improvingthis department’s apps is a priorityfor the next year.

Consider each department’sfeedback individually to ensureapplications meet the needs of

every user group.Determine next steps for

application improvement - whetherto upgrade, maintain, retrain on or

retire an app – based on overallapplication effectiveness and the

criticality of each application to anemployee’s job function.

Application Features & Usability

Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied


ExtremelyEffectiveUsability

UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

6REASSESS

6RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

4EFFECTIVE

6UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

3UNLEVERAGED

0

(Department)Applications Portfolio

Overview

Drill down into individual applications, and compare this department’s satisfactionscores against average satisfaction within the organization to decide if improving thisdepartment’s apps is a priority for the next year.

Importance & Effectiveness by Department

Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation

Microsoft Excel 201082%

96%87%

96%87%

96% --% Effective Maintain

Microsoft Word 201088%

92%88%

95%89%


Numara Software Track-It!63%

92%75%

61%78%

71% 63% Contentious Retrain

Hemoco Lansweeper 5.192%

92%83%

83%81%

81% 86% Effective Maintain

Opsera Opsview Agent 3.975%

75%90%

90%78%


VMware AirWatch71%

71%53%

53%56%

56% --% Contentious Reassess

ELIE Employee Directory 1.0.047%

63%56%

54%63%

64% 50% Contentious Reassess

Microsoft Powerpoint 201051%

63%83%

86%86%


ADEMCO PassPoint Plus 2.158%

58%36%

36%41%


Microsoft Visio 201054%

54%82%

82%88%


Microsoft Publisher 201042%

29%76%

61%76%

64% --% Questionable Reassess

Smartfile MPRB FTP Services15%

8%54%

40%62%


Compu-SOLVE MinuteTraq 8.7.621%

8%59%

35%60%

38% 73% Questionable Reassess

Company Average

Information Technology Services Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


77%7%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

1MAINTAIN

8REASSESS

4RETRAIN

0


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

2EFFECTIVE

7UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

3UNLEVERAGED

1


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%88%

93%89%


Adobe Adobe Creative Suite 637%

100%76%

93%77%


Internet Explorer 985%

89%81%

77%83%

47% --% Contentious Upgrade


89%75%

80%78%


Adobe Acrobat Professional 1060%

89%76%

87%83%



78%83%

93%86%



78%87%

93%87%


Disarea LLC 5pm 1.1780%

78%51%

77%57%


ActiveNet67%

56%51%

47%46%



44%56%

50%63%



33%59%

90%60%

90% 90% Unleveraged Maintain


33%54%

45%62%



11%76%

30%76%


Company Average

Marketing & Communications Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


68%2%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

8REASSESS

4RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

1EFFECTIVE

5UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

4UNLEVERAGED

3


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


89%88%

87%89%



85%81%

81%83%



84%87%

85%87%


ActiveNet67%

80%51%

53%46%



67%75%

79%78%



65%76%

81%76%



44%83%

83%86%

84% --% Unleveraged Maintain


42%56%

56%63%



29%76%

73%77%


ADT-Matrix RASplus 1.4.416%

17%64%

64%63%



15%59%

66%60%


Red Egg Software ieSpell 2.5.110%

10%61%

61%65%



9%54%

60%62%

66% --% Questionable Retrain

Company Average

Recreation Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


100%30%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

1MAINTAIN

7REASSESS

4RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

1EFFECTIVE

4UNWANTED

1QUESTIONABLE

2UNLEVERAGED

5


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%87%

100%87%



89%81%

93%83%



78%76%

80%83%


IBM Cognos Planning OfflineContributor 8.2

56%56%

57%57%

60%60% --% Contentious Reassess


56%88%

83%89%



44%83%

80%86%


Apple iOS 844%

44%25%

25%45%



44%75%

90%78%



33%59%

55%60%


Forestry 2.5.1.025%

33%75%

75%90%



22%76%

83%76%

65% --% Unleveraged Upgrade


22%56%

60%63%

90% 65% Unleveraged Retrain


--%54%

10%62%

50% --% Unwanted Reassess

Company Average

Finance Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


80%10%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

4REASSESS

6RETRAIN

0


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

4UNWANTED

6QUESTIONABLE

0UNLEVERAGED

0


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%81%

90%83%



100%88%

100%89%



100%75%

100%78%



100%87%

100%87%



33%56%

20%63%

20% 20% Unwanted Reassess


--%76%

--%76%

--% --% Unwanted Reassess


--%59%

--%60%



--%83%

--%86%



--%54%

--%62%



--%76%

--%83%


Company Average

Facilities Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


70%--%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

3REASSESS

8RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

1CONTENTIOUS

2EFFECTIVE

3UNWANTED

6QUESTIONABLE

0UNLEVERAGED

0


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%81%

50%83%

70% --% Contentious Retrain


100%88%

100%89%



100%83%

100%86%



100%87%

100%87%



67%59%

50%60%



67%56%

30%63%

30% 20% Hazardous Reassess


33%75%

--%78%

--% 60% Unwanted Reassess

ActiveNet67%

--%51%

--%46%



--%76%

--%76%


Brother P-touch --%

--% --%

--% --%


SALTO Systems USB Device4%

--%60%

--%50%



--%54%

--%62%


Company Average

Human Resources Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


93%23%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

2MAINTAIN

5REASSESS

9RETRAIN

0


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

1CONTENTIOUS

1EFFECTIVE

4UNWANTED

8QUESTIONABLE

0UNLEVERAGED

2


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%88%

100%89%


ActiveNet67%

100%51%

77%46%

63% 57% Effective Upgrade


89%81%

100%83%



89%87%

100%87%



67%75%

70%78%

60% 70% Contentious Upgrade


67%56%

25%63%



33%76%

85%76%



33%83%

90%86%


Record Sheets --%

--% --%

--% --%



--%54%

--%62%


APS PocketCitation --%

--% --%

--% --%


ADT-Matrix RASplus 1.4.416%

--%64%

--%63%


Nero Essentials 7 --%

--% --%

--% --%



--%59%

--%60%


Adobe Photoshop --%

--% --%

--% --%


AZ Loan Desk --%

--% --%

--% --%


Company Average

Customer Service Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


73%3%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

4REASSESS

6RETRAIN

0


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

2EFFECTIVE

4UNWANTED

2QUESTIONABLE

2UNLEVERAGED

0


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%88%

90%89%



100%87%

90%87%



89%75%

83%78%



67%81%

47%83%



67%83%

83%86%



56%54%

50%62%



44%56%

40%63%



44%76%

65%76%


ActiveNet67%

22%51%

10%46%

10% 30% Unwanted Reassess


--%59%

--%60%


Company Average

Economic Development Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


64%6%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

5REASSESS

2RETRAIN

4


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

4UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

3UNLEVERAGED

4


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


90%88%

94%89%



86%81%

90%83%



62%75%

66%78%



57%87%

67%87%



43%56%

60%63%

75% 74% Unleveraged Retrain


43%83%

66%86%



33%76%

62%83%

80% --% Unleveraged Retrain


29%54%

46%62%



24%76%

62%76%

85% --% Unleveraged Retrain


14%76%

52%77%



14%59%

46%60%


Company Average

Asset Management Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


80%10%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

1MAINTAIN

9REASSESS

4RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

3EFFECTIVE

7UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

2UNLEVERAGED

3


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%87%

89%87%



97%88%

87%89%



92%76%

85%83%



81%83%

83%86%


Disarea LLC 5pm 1.1780%

81%51%

45%57%



75%76%

91%77%



72%59%

57%60%


AutoDesk AutoCAD 1964%

64%81%

81%77%



61%75%

67%78%



61%56%

55%63%


Environmental Systems ResearchInstitute ArcRea...

38%39%

80%83%

61%50% 91% Unleveraged Upgrade


36%54%

53%62%


ActiveNet67%

28%51%

50%46%


Google SketchUp Pro 8 v328%

28%80%

80%90%



17%76%

70%76%


Company Average

Planning & Project Management Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


72%2%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

5REASSESS

1RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

1CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

2UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

1UNLEVERAGED

3


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation

ActiveNet67%

67%51%

28%46%



60%81%

73%83%



60%88%

80%89%



47%59%

63%60%

68% 70% Questionable Retrain


40%83%

90%86%



40%87%

90%87%



20%76%

80%76%


Company Average

Commissioners Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


52%18%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

1MAINTAIN

7REASSESS

5RETRAIN

0


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

4UNWANTED

4QUESTIONABLE

1UNLEVERAGED

4


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


87%81%

74%83%



73%88%

84%89%



73%87%

94%87%



38%67%

80%78%

61%70% 70% Effective Maintain


47%56%

88%63%


Vegetation Database40%

40%70%

70%65%

65% 65% Unleveraged Upgrade


33%76%

50%83%



33%75%

83%78%



27%83%

100%86%



13%76%

--%77%



7%76%

30%76%



7%54%

--%62%



--%59%

--%60%


Company Average

Facility Management Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


60%10%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

7REASSESS

4RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

6UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

5UNLEVERAGED

1


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


93%81%

77%83%



89%88%

84%89%



81%87%

83%87%



63%83%

81%86%



59%76%

81%76%



56%76%

72%83%



48%75%

72%78%



44%56%

58%63%


NEOGOV NeoGov33%

33%64%

64%64%



26%59%

63%60%



22%54%

64%62%


TechSmith Snagit 9.115%

15%57%

57%55%


Company Average

Community Outreach Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


69%1%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

6REASSESS

4RETRAIN

0


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

4UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

4UNLEVERAGED

2


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


81%81%

91%83%



76%88%

86%89%



62%75%

74%78%



57%87%

88%87%



33%56%

50%63%



33%83%

90%86%



24%76%

83%76%


SALTO Systems USB Device4%

5%60%

60%50%



5%59%

50%60%



--%54%

50%62%


Company Average

Maintenance Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


25%45%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

2MAINTAIN

4REASSESS

3RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

1EFFECTIVE

3UNWANTED

2QUESTIONABLE

2UNLEVERAGED

2


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


83%88%

75%89%



67%81%

60%83%



67%83%

80%86%



67%87%

80%87%



33%75%

100%78%



33%59%

70%60%

50% 90% Questionable Upgrade


17%56%

50%63%

80% 20% Questionable Retrain


17%76%

100%76%



--%54%

--%62%



--%76%

--%83%


Company Average

Police Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


80%10%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

0REASSESS

0RETRAIN

0


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

0UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

0UNLEVERAGED

0


Overview


Office of the Superintendent Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


63%7%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

7MAINTAIN

7REASSESS

0RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

7UNWANTED

0QUESTIONABLE

1UNLEVERAGED

7


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%88%

88%89%



94%81%

85%83%



89%87%

88%87%



67%75%

76%78%



67%56%

65%63%

73% 63% Effective Retrain


56%83%

82%86%



50%76%

80%76%



22%54%

75%62%



38%17%

80%80%

61%65% 85% Unleveraged Upgrade

US EPA Stormwater Calculator11%

11%80%

80%60%



11%59%

70%60%

57% 67% Questionable Upgrade

Isco, Inc. Flowlink 5.16%

6%80%

80%60%

60% 90% Unleveraged Upgrade

USACE Bathtub --%

--%80%

80%60%


USACE Flux32 Software for LoadEstimation --

%--%

80%80%

60%60% --% Unleveraged Upgrade

USACE P8 Urban CatchmentModel 3.4 --

%--%

80%80%

60%60% --% Unleveraged Upgrade

Company Average

Environmental Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129


50%20%

Compared toCompany









Feat

ures

Extr

emel

ySa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Dis

satis

fied



UPGRADE

0MAINTAIN

3REASSESS

8RETRAIN

1


Impo

rtan

ce

Unu

sed

Nic

e to

Hav

eIm

port

ant

Mis

sion

Criti

cal




HAZARDOUS

0CONTENTIOUS

0EFFECTIVE

4UNWANTED

8QUESTIONABLE

0UNLEVERAGED

0


Overview



Applications

Importance

Features

Usability Data

Quality Status

Recommendation


100%81%

70%83%



100%56%

70%63%



67%87%

90%87%



67%88%

60%89%

80% --% Effective Retrain


33%83%

--%86%



33%76%

--%76%



--%54%

--%62%



--%75%

--%78%


IBM M5 --%

--% --%

--% --%



--%59%

--%60%


Isuzu Motors America, Inc. NDiesel 52 Retail CD 1 --

%--% --

%--% --

%--% --% Unwanted Reassess

eVision Technologies GroupmediaCAT 2013 --

%--% --

%--% --

%--% --% Unwanted Reassess

Company Average

Trades Overview Application Feedback Program


of 129

Satisfaction Metrics

92%Importance

--%Compared toCompany

81%Usability

13%Compared toCompany

83%Features


86%Data Quality


Number ofDepartments by

Features & Usability

Ease of use and features capability can variablyimpact application effectiveness. Understand enduser perspectives in this regard to decide onmitigation strategies.

Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied

ExtremelyDissatisfied

ExtremelySatisfiedUsability

UpgradeDept. Users Imp.

MaintainDept. Users Imp.Information Technology ... 8 92%

ReassessDept. Users Imp.

RetrainDept. Users Imp.

Importance &Effectiveness by

Seniority

Stakeholders often have very different perspectives on the importance and effectiveness ofkey applications. Ensure everyone is on the same page and facilitate discussions where thereare discrepancies to ensure mitigation strategies target the right user groups.

Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

13%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important 100% 90% 80% 90%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

25%of user base

2Users

Critical 100% 80% 80% 80%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Front Line

63%of user base

5Users

Critical 80% 90% 93% 95%

Important 20% 50% 40% 60%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

Hemoco Lansweeper 5.1 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

InformationTechnologyServices

Effective Maintain 92% 83% 81% 86% 8

I use this to look up information on servers and desktop computers.

Fantastic application that I use daily. A must have for asset information and support!

Custom Reports to show last user, software and computer ID on one line

Lansweeper contains valuable information but custom reporting capabilities areimpractical. The cumbersome configuration renders the data almost useless andfrustrating to access, especially when needing to turn it around quickly.

Look up information about our network devices

This helps with keeping track of computers, software and, allows the ability to remote intovarious computers on the network which is helpful.

Q: What about the following applications makes it most helpful or detrimental to you performing your job effectively?

Hemoco Lansweeper 5.1 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129


88%Importance


89%Usability


88%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied




MaintainDept. Users Imp.Recreation 48 89%

Planning & Project Mana... 12 97%

Community Outreach 9 89%

Information Technology ... 8 92%

Asset Management 7 90%

Environmental 6 100%

Maintenance 7 76%

Facility Management 5 73%

Economic Development 3 100%

Customer Service 3 100%


RetrainDept. Users Imp.Trades 1 67%


Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

12%of user base

15Users

Critical 86% 88% 88% --%

Important 6% 80% 80% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 6% --% --% --%

Manager

28%of user base

35Users

Critical 65% 91% 93% --%

Important 25% 83% 86% --%

Nice to have 8% 63% 67% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Front Line

60%of user base

74Users

Critical 71% 91% 91% --%

Important 24% 85% 87% --%

Nice to have 5% 63% 73% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

Microsoft Word 2010 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses



Required to share, edit, and update documents

Application has a lot of options available. I use it every day and have never beendisappointed in its functionality.

Using this to create documents, which helps me do my job effectively.

Document the configurations

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Marketing &Communications Effective Maintain 100% 93% 90% 0% 3

Relatively easy to use, although I'd like more training on advanced features. I just use thebasics.

Standard application necessary to do business.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Recreation Effective Maintain 89% 87% 89% 0% 48

word processing

paperwork

I think all the functions are fine for my use

hit the wrong button and you can't undo your damage sometimes. -- training on all thenew features would be helpful.

word is sufficient

Good - no complaints

Ease of use.

needed for work/ community communications, easy to use

Typing and sending group emailings

Nice for word processing.

I am galde that we updated to 2010

Flyers, posters, letters, documents

This is an easy app to use, I like it.

must have to perform basic functions of the job

Very helpful for brochures, letters, internal documents...use all the time.

I use Word mostly to read and edit documents. I do not have create many documents.

always great.

I lick it and it is useful in my everyday job function. However, clip art is not current or not alot of choices.

No issues.

Great for making documents

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Microsoft Word 2010 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129

Finance Effective Maintain 56% 83% 83% 0% 3

works good; very rarely use it.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Facilities Effective Maintain 100% 100% 90% 0% 1

Use it all the time to create work documents.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

CustomerService Effective Maintain 100% 100% 100% 0% 3

Works well.

Used weekly- needed to contact customers for notifications.

Need letters sent daily

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

EconomicDevelopment Effective Maintain 100% 90% 93% 0% 3

I don't understand why MS has to move the buttons around and we have to relearn wherethey are. It slows us down. We know what we need to do but can't do it as fast.

Does not integrate well with graphics that we have created for previous years in previousversions of Word

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

AssetManagement Effective Maintain 90% 94% 96% 0% 7

We do alot of documenting situations, Word makes it easy for the entire department touse.

Don't use

nicke to write documents

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Planning &ProjectManagement


I know the program and have used it for years...am very comfortable with it.

The Help Features Available! EASY TO USE!

I use this app for Construction specifications, formal letters, most every typing documentexcept Excel and Email

Essential - Daily use.

use a lot, easy, flexible quick. Is a bit clunky with graphic formatting and images, then Imight switch to InDesign or Photoshop.

Solid. Industry standard. Important for transferring files to/from consultants, collaborators,etc.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Commissioners Effective Maintain 60% 80% 97% 0% 5



of 129

the only detriment is my skill level in using the product, just recently learned how to put awatermark on a document

Sharing info

N/A

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

FacilityManagement Effective Maintain 73% 84% 78% 0% 5

I dont use word very often. I wish it was easier to use for small projects.

spell check is great

Easy to use

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

CommunityOutreach Effective Maintain 89% 84% 87% 0% 9

This application is key to performing my job effectively. It would be helpful if the Microsoftoffice suite ran a little more reliably and I wouldn't turn down training opportunities tolearn how to use this application more effectively but this is an application I use daily.

Most helpful in creating labels and documents.

I often have to type up contracts, letters or other documents. People also send meinformation and I would not be able to open if I did not have this software.

It's installed on my laptop

Important because I do a lot of reports and administrative work.

Essential for compiling information

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Maintenance Effective Maintain 76% 86% 86% 0% 7

I use this for letters of recommendation or other documentaion.

Making agendas for meetings and other needed forms or documents

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Environmental Effective Maintain 100% 88% 83% 0% 6

The ability to communicate inside and outside of the organization and file/archiveinformation.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Trades Effective Retrain 67% 60% 80% 0% 1

I use this app to construct documaent and letters.



of 129


85%Importance


83%Usability


81%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied



UpgradeDept. Users Imp.Marketing & Communicat... 3 89%




Maintenance 7 81%

Environmental 6 94%


Commissioners 5 60%

Finance 3 89%

Customer Service 3 89%

Facilities 1 100%

ReassessDept. Users Imp.Economic Development 3 67%

Police 2 67%

RetrainDept. Users Imp.Human Resources 1 100%


Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

13%of user base

13Users

Critical 53% 86% 91% --%

Important 46% 75% 80% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

28%of user base

29Users

Critical 62% 88% 91% --%

Important 37% 85% 85% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Front Line

60%of user base

62Users

Critical 66% 82% 85% --%

Important 27% 71% 71% --%

Nice to have 3% 60% 85% --%

Do not use 4% 20% 20% --%

Companyavg.

Internet Explorer 9 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Marketing &Communications Contentious Upgrade 89% 77% 47% 0% 3

IE has issues occasionally with speed/crashing, but overall it's fine when I use it. I mainlyuse Chrome.

I only use this browser because it is the only one compatible with our outdated website.Once we have a new site (soon!) I will likely not use this browser except to checkcompatibility.

IE is just clunky and not as user friendly in my opinion. In order to use the Menu Editor asan Admin for the current website you have to use IE which is bizarre to me. You can useChrome for all other aspects - but you need to run IE for the Menu Editor to see whatpages are on the site.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


calendar, email, ease of use

need for collabo with other agencies.

information searc functions

slow and crashes frequently

internet is important for research

Even though we now have Comcast, the internet is pretty slow and locks up a fair amount.

Speed and consistency of this application is critical to our business.

I don't care for Explorer. The only time I use it is at work.

needed for job research, easy to use

As far as I know not much

Explorer doesn't seem to be compatible with ActiveNet. It freezes up often and takeslonger to process than with other browser, such as Chrome.

I hate that many sites are not available.

Ability to look up information when needed with easy access

This is fine, I don't have troubles using this app.

Need to have to research locations and information for activities and programs

We need IE, as we can't be in Chrome to use ActiveNet (at least the credit card reader)

Do not understand archiving emails or how to efficiently organise my email folders. Itwould be very helpful to have standards on the how, what, where, when and how long tostore emails.

Pbintra, google, mapquest, searching engine

I need to Explorer to enter invoices, payroll, access our intranet. Explorer can be very slowat times.

Slow, slow and slower. difficult to do my job efficiently when most of my work intails usingthe internet.

It very useful.

I use Internett Exlporer a lot in my daily job functions. I do reserach on current recreationtends and activities/event in other states or countries. I use Internet Explore for directions,events, information and knowledge for job enhancement etc...


Internet Explorer 9 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129

No issues for me. It is great for us to use to look for new program ideas and to planprograms. We need it for ordering supplies from vendors, os it is crtical for us to have.

Easy Research

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Easy to use; works with PeopleSoft for our payroll, HR and finance software. It's fast andeasy to search in.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Good tool for staying on task. I use the calender for meetings and or I enter notes of thingsthat I don't want to forget.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

HumanResources Contentious Retrain 100% 50% 70% 0% 1

It is frustrating that I have to use different internet browsers for different business needs.For example, Internet Explorer allows me to PDF documents in NEOGOV but Chrome doesnot. Internet Explorer requires HTML coding in NEOGOV but Chrome does not. InternetExplorer has issues with printing to our HR printer from time to time so I switch and printfrom Chrome. I have had IT look at this issue periodically but the issue never stays resolved(soemtimes after our copier is fixed) so I have found my own workarounds to keep thingsmoving.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Works well.

All information and processing is via IE. Used daily. Needed 100 %.

Need quick access to companies for emails and people to contact.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

EconomicDevelopment Contentious Reassess 67% 47% 50% 0% 3

since we got windows 7 the internet is even slower than windows xp. What happened? Imiss the old buttons.

using old version - cannot use some more up to date websites (cannot use to apply forcertain critical grants)

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Researching product, vendors, etc. is crucial to our job.

Researching,problem solving.

Useful to find info or vendors

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses



of 129

Commissioners Effective Maintain 60% 73% 85% 0% 5

i hate internet explorer, so I down loaded Mozilla Firefox which i am much happier with

Internet function

Ability to communication with my constituents

N/A

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Having access to the internet is very helpful. I use it every day for a host of reasons. I donot htink that i have to have Internet Explorer as long as the replacement allows easy andfast access.

fast and accurate

Easy to understand

I prefer using Firefox

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Majority of websites I enter, specifically Google Drive, give me warnings that the currentversion of Internet Explorer that I'm using is not compatible with the website or not up todate.

Almost all of the community organizations I work with use the internet as a primary meansof communicating information and sharing resources. It would be helpful if it was easier to

use apps such as google docs and drop box as this is the way the communities I amworking with are conducting their outreach, communication and collaboration.

I use internet explorer to research and find partners, sponsors and donors for events. It ishelpful for quick searches.

I can not access Compass or the internet which is a large part of what I do


Allow me to do research!

Research for variety of projects

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Knowing what is going on in the whole parkboard system than just my area of work.

Use this daily for vender search and Research

Having access to information

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


The ability to research potential community partners and program participants.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Trades Effective Maintain 100% 70% 70% 0% 1



of 129

I use this app to order materials, check weather and look up building codes andtechniques.



of 129


82%Importance


87%Usability


87%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied






Information Technology ... 8 96%


Environmental 6 89%

Maintenance 7 57%




Finance 3 100%




Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

12%of user base

15Users

Critical 80% 84% 84% --%

Important 13% 90% 85% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 6% --% --% --%

Manager

28%of user base

35Users

Critical 54% 90% 85% --%

Important 31% 85% 85% --%

Nice to have 8% 57% 57% --%

Do not use 5% 90% 60% --%

Front Line

60%of user base

74Users

Critical 56% 93% 93% --%

Important 37% 86% 87% --%

Nice to have 4% 70% 65% --%

Do not use 2% 10% --% --%

Companyavg.

Microsoft Excel 2010 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses



I use this for everything from project plans to budgets.

I use this application more than any other for it's ability to store, sort and calculate data.

Creating and entering data into spreadsheets, this is helpful.

Document information during and after project

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Relatively easy to use. I'd like more training on advanced features. I just use the basics.Most of the tricks I know are from a college course back in the 90s!


Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


spreadsheet use and formula applications

for meeting and confereneces

document creation and sorting of information

would be nice to understand how to use it better training on all the new features would behelpful.

very important to job

Could use more training

Ease of use. Great for many applications at work.

use it for budget tracking and communication, takes traing to use properly

I think I might use this for letters and flyers. It's either this one or Microsoft Word 2010

Excellent for budgeting, making rosters, planning, etc.

Statistical Reports

I am galde that we updated to 2010

Could use more system wide training- consistently needed and not available.

spreadsheets, tables

This app is good for what little I know of it. I need to take some trainings-

Need to create documents for many items of the job

I'd like to become more familiar with this program, but I can certainly use it well enough tocreate tables, etc.

Would appreciate on-going training to better utilize the many features EXCEL offers. Iwould like to be more savy at knowing how/when/what EXCEL can do for me so I am moreefficient in my budget tracking, scheduling, etc.

I use Excel to create budgeting reports for my own use. I also need to read and edit spreadsheets from my manger.

great, helpful.


Microsoft Excel 2010 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129

I use Microsoft Excel for spread sheets and budgets.

Again, more training would be great. I know the city does one but it has been dificult toregister for one of their trainings.

Works for lists, data, etc...

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Newer features very helpful. Easy to navigate through. Better than the previous.

It is prone to crash.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Use it all the time to create work documents.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Very long process.

Used monthly for reports- reported needed for notifications and mail merges

Need spreadsheets for tracking, schedules and data reports.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


I don't understand why MS has to move the buttons around and we have to relearn wherethey are. It slows us down. We know what we need to do but can't do it as fast.

Does not always integrate well with our previous version

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Don't use

n/a

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses





Obviously I use this app when I need to produce a chart or table. I use Excel mostly forMPRB Construction Permits issued logs but also within construction Specifications

Essential - Daily use, but more for organization, project management, and tracking lists,rather than for financial functions. I've tried other "list" and "proeject management"software, but keep coming back to Excel because I can see and sort a lot of information ina simple and dense format and like that. There might be a good project management



of 129

software out there that I don't know about, that would include task list/due date/status,contact info with outreach notes, reminders, status reports, budget, PR/communicationsoutreach tracker, timetable, etc. But often times those get fussy and cumbersome andcan't be emailed to others. Everyone's got Excel so it makes sharing easy. I also use Macs athome, so am able to take work on Excel home if needed

use a lot

As above: solid, industry standard. Very important for tracking project costs and forvisualizing timelines.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Commissioners Unleveraged Maintain 40% 90% 95% 0% 5

The only detriment is my skill level in using the product, functions are the devil

N/A

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


I depend on Excel for a lot of my job. I find it very helpful. I wish I was better trained inusing it.

accurate

Works fine for most of the stuff we need it for

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


This application is useful to me. It would be helpful if the Microsoft office suite ran a littlemore reliably and I wouldn't turn down training opportunities to learn how to use thisapplication more effectively.

Essential for budgeting and organizing data

This helps keep information such as group lists, information, other important data in oneplace. I also use this to keep record of the departments financial information.


I'm the budget manager for my department and I do reports.

Essential for random selection and organizing data

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


have not done setup, just add/adjust existing

I do not use this much, but I did for putting together the MSDS program.

Use to create invoices or schedules

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


The ability to keep a fluid spreadsheet of program participants and information about theirevents.



of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses Trades Effective Maintain 67% 90% 80% 0% 1

I construct spead sheets here



of 129


80%Importance


57%Usability


51%Features


61%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied




MaintainDept. Users Imp.Marketing & Communicat... 3 78%

ReassessDept. Users Imp.Planning & Project Mana... 12 81%



Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

7%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important 100% 30% 10% 20%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

27%of user base

4Users

Critical 50% 60% 50% 70%

Important 50% 20% 15% 35%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Front Line

67%of user base

10Users

Critical 40% 53% 65% 73%

Important 60% 62% 75% 68%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

Disarea LLC 5pm 1.17 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


It's good for keeping work logs - keeping track of which departments I'm helping, but notgood as a project planning tool as we'd hoped. Wish computers came with MicrosoftProject.

Entering tasks and runny reports is time consuming and clunky.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Contentious Reassess 81% 45% 51% 60% 12

Not able to track time like a time/billing software would; integration with COMPASS andreporting features are weak

It's difficult to use, in terms of what our needs are, but that may be because it's notdesigned to be used for what we are using it for.

EASY TO USE!

Difficult to change entries - move to other projects, etc. - once entered. Wastes a lot oftime.

this app is very, very slow. It is also uncapable of performing simple operations that Worddo seamlessly

The program is not well suited for the type of information we want to gather from it. Itdoes not allow us to sort by individual and project effectively.

very slow and difficult to use with the number of projects, not able to personalize it to myprojects. It slows the longer you use it and has to be re-started often.

Clunky and cumbersome. Slow. Have to use it and don't like it. Would be nice if could selectwhich project folders I use, then see subset filtered display of only those projects, so aren'tscrolling so much. Lots of clicking needed to get the info in. Not a fan of the app - toosimple without options. I won't track in the moment, like to do at end of day.

easy to understand, but it seems very cumbersome to enter time in - have to do a newentry and pick date for each day and different project- could be 10 entries per day

I really dislike this application. As a time tracking software it leaves a lot to be desired.There is little flexibility and very little ability for me to generate meaningful reports.QuickBooks has a much better time tracking application, and I am sure there are othersout there.


Disarea LLC 5pm 1.17 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129


75%Importance


78%Usability


90%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied




MaintainDept. Users Imp.Information Technology ... 8 75%




Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

13%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important 100% 80% 80% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

25%of user base

2Users

Critical 50% 80% 100% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 50% --% --% --%

Front Line

63%of user base

5Users

Critical 60% 97% 73% --%

Important 40% 90% 70% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

Opsera Opsview Agent 3.9 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses



Network monitoring and alerting

A must have for Monitoring network connectivity.

Opsview seems to supply accurate, useful information, but has not been clearlyincorporated into support processes. Training has felt slap dash, staff may benefit frommore explicit and thorough instruction - including supporting our own user accounts.

Monitor the network and get alerts for problems

Keeps track of our network communications, its important to know when a site is down.


Opsera Opsview Agent 3.9 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129


71%Importance


56%Usability


53%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied




MaintainDept. Users Imp.

ReassessDept. Users Imp.Information Technology ... 8 71%



Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

13%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important 100% 70% 70% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

25%of user base

2Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important 100% 70% 70% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Front Line

63%of user base

5Users

Critical 60% 60% 60% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have 40% 15% 30% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

VMware AirWatch Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Contentious Reassess 71% 53% 56% 0% 8

Mobile Device Management is key to us securing the mobile devices.

The only application we have for MDM. Compatibility issues with our environment.Functionality is limited because of compatibility issues. GUI is complex. Technical supportis weak and engineering struggles to keep up with technology. Very time consuming tomanage and lack of functionality creates end user frustration. With that being said, itappears to be the best bang for the buck.

Perhaps a suitable option for managing mobile devices, nobody working with the softwarehas time to develop the expertise navigating the system effectively. Applications andpolicies have been a struggle to keep current, especially in relationship to frequent devicespecific operating system updates. Adequate training has not been provided for the team(especially more peripheral support staff) to stay up to speed or feel comfortable withbasic use, certainly none of us is knowledgeable enough to leverage the tool to fullcapacity.

Manage the mobile devices

Manages phones and pushes out applications to those phones.


VMware AirWatch Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129


67%Importance


46%Usability


51%Features


59%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied



UpgradeDept. Users Imp.Customer Service 3 100%


ReassessDept. Users Imp.Recreation 48 80%


Commissioners 5 67%

Marketing & Communicat... 3 56%


Human Resources 1 --%



Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

13%of user base

10Users

Critical 60% 60% 57% 73%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have 30% 23% 20% 37%

Do not use 10% 40% 40% 80%

Manager

24%of user base

18Users

Critical 44% 56% 36% 55%

Important 5% 80% 50% 60%

Nice to have 27% 30% 33% 55%

Do not use 22% 50% 50% --%

Front Line

63%of user base

47Users

Critical 55% 58% 55% 60%

Important 14% 43% 35% 58%

Nice to have 14% 48% 50% 60%

Do not use 14% 10% 10% 30%

Companyavg.

ActiveNet Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Marketing &Communications Contentious Reassess 56% 47% 37% 43% 3

So much to learn that it's overwhelming. It's not intuitive on back end. It is a powerfulsoftware, but due to that it's very time consuming to figure out. It seems to take a lot oftime for ActiveNet to respond to issues when they arise. Staff is making strides tostreamline content, but training/turnover/tech support are big issues. I'd recommendadding at least 1-2 employees - one to strictly manage ActiveNet technology and anotherwho oversees online content (text, categories, photos, etc.). Could actually see growingan entire small department dedicated to ActiveNet. It is way too important not tomanage this more effectively. It's difficult not having dedicated internal support for suchan important software. As ActiveNet changes we're going to get further and furtherbehind if we don't add more resources (staff) who can manage and improve it. ANSC andGurus are not enough and do not have time with their other responsibilities. Wonderinghow we will manage ActiveNet and an asset management software that I’ve heard iscoming next year.

The admin side of ActiveNet both on Chrome and IE is slow, and not very intuitive. Whencreating events you will submit edits or changes to an event and the page will refreshand half of the time the changes are not made on the public facing side of AN.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Recreation Contentious Reassess 80% 53% 49% 62% 48

Difficult for public to find programs. It is only as good as the staff inputting theirdescriptions which is inconsistent. Is terrible to work with for athletic league schedulingcausing triple the work for staff. Other departments are not held accountable to use it anddon't which causes more work for staff. there is not a "resident expert" on staff in IT to goto for support. When problems arise staff is told to contact the Active.net assistance hotline and is usually waiting hours and sometimes days for assistance. Active.net is not held

accountable to serve our needs and develop initiatives they were asked to. Very expensivefor the frustration it causes staff.

its good for reports

registration, marketing and facility usage

Isn't helpful in tracking the infomation my department needs.

overlaps are terrible - keeps me from renting fields that are usable, setting up rentals - thequestons don't fit the space being rented. (ie - outdoor biffs to use a center's kitchen? closethe park way to rent a meeting room?) very cumbersome! things change frequently andthen don't work which slows us down.

getting better

This application is critical for our business. Unfortunately it is not very reliable. It is oftenslow and inconsistent. The reports for this application are often slow and cumbersome.

Critical for work and can often be cumbersome and difficult for employeesa dn especiallythe public to use

It's used for enrolling, billing, make payments and creating profiles

Overly complicated. Not customized for the MPRB. We have to wade through so much thatwe don't utilize but some other agency needs. It's too convoluted. For the money we'respending on this, they should be able to customize a site for us so we don't have somemuch extra stuff in there that causes errors when we click this or don't click that.

Too much of the league portion of the Active software does not work porperly. Too manywork arounds.

Reporting process is limited

I am not a fan of Active Net, there are too many steps, just to complete on task.

Procesing payments and customer information along with activity enrollments


ActiveNet Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129

The majority of the complaints I recieve from the public that I directly serve is howcumbersome Active Net is. People tell me that they want to be able to do 2 clicks and bewhere they wish to be, that it takes too many steps to find the program or park they areinterested in. On my administrative end, I find that I have the same complaint. It is awfulthat I must do between 5-9 clicks to complete a task. This is not user friendly soft ware.

Log in every 10 min and some issues with credit cards.

Its what we have that we use everyday to survive with programs and registration. Not usedto full potential

Oh, where do I begin? We need it to do our job, as this is how people register for ourprograms. The problem is, the public just can't seem to get used to it. Even after a fewyears, we are still constantly getting complaints about how hard it is to find things. I can'thonestly say I'm fluent in it, either. I do have to say the creation of the ActiveNet newsletterthat comes out, has been very helpful.

There are some opprtunities to make this program more user friendly and customized tothe park board.

having the issues with the system not working on credit card transactions is verytroublesome and needs to be fixed ASAP

This system still seems much too cumbersome. There are too many clicks to navigate thesystem, I'm not trained on reports that would make tracking my bduget much easier. TheFlexReg system is a disaster...customers still not happy with acitvent overall. The one thingthat I do like about ActiveNet is the help line. I can call them anytime and get help with aproblem. They are always friendly, respectful and take the time to help. They will alsofollow through if they can't answer my quesiton right away.

Data, program search, customer search

I don not use ActiveNet

So slow it seems to be going backwards at times. not realiable. 100% of my pro shop usageis on Activenet and it continues to go down or work very slowly. it is embarassing at times

when you are in the pro shop with guests in front of you trying to give you money for tehservices we offer

use daily and it great.

Great application, just way too many steps to get input or output from it. Not a very userfriendly System. Also, limitation to cutsumize make it that much more dif. to use or adds tothe mass amount of steps to get info.

I like Activenet but it has a lot of functions that I am still learning. Some functions/steps arediffercult to complete.

I feel I understand ActiveNet fairly well due to being on the ActiveNet committee, but otherstaff struggle using it because it is so in depth. Running reports on ActiveNet is extremelybeneficially for me in my position, but again others have not been trained in as much as Ihave been and continue to struggle with this aspect of Active. We need to have a set ofguidelines and rules established for Recreation professionals entering in programs.Running audits is fine but sometimes it is subjective based on who your supervisor is, interms of what is acceptable to enter into Active and how it is entered. This has been betterrecently due to the audits, but a cheatsheet needs to be established to become moreuniform when enetering activities.

The Customer is so frustrated with Activenet in so many ways. I as a staff am frustrated byit so as a user I am sure it is even worse.

Poor but used a lot for entering scores, registration, etc...

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

CustomerService Effective Upgrade 100% 77% 63% 57% 3

still frustrating. cumbersome way to get or correct information. If I have to book a picnicand it's within 15 days, I have to go through a separate link which makes me guess some ofthe choices and are sometimes wrong.



of 129

Needed 100%.

100% permits and invoicing Financial Reports Customer Data Receipts and Ledgers

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

EconomicDevelopment Unwanted Reassess 22% 10% 10% 30% 3

This program could not be much worse. Awful functionality often does not work I still haveto personally call staff at work sites to make sure they know that I have a reservation

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Questionable Reassess 28% 50% 43% 73% 12

N/A

NA

Very, very, very unuser friendly. You have to use this app everyday to retain the the abilityto effectively use this unfriendly user app or you will not able to use it at all without writtenstep-by-step instructions. Worst program I have ever tried to use. ActiveNet is albsolutely ahorrible app.

As an infrequent user, it always feels like I need to "relearn" the program when I want touse it.

very hard to use for someone who is not a regular user. Choices are not intuitive. I oftenask others to help with it because it does not give me the information I need or I can't findit and it takes too long.

Don't use much so not very familiar, though had training and can do basics. I realize it'smore powerful than what I use it for. Doesn't reflect all assets in park system (onlyreservable ones), so not as essential to my daily work, though the need for it withrecreation and permits is essential.

don't use, but believe it's important

Don't use.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Commissioners Hazardous Reassess 67% 28% 30% 38% 5

The system is difficult to navigate, infuriating for casual users to the point that they will goto a rec center to complete their registration or just give up on registering alltogether.Would love to see a simpler/more user friendly interface developed for the general public.

The search function is awful, making a mistake with adding a credit card number makesyou reenter everything about the card, copying a link to a specific page to use elsewheredoesn't work, takes you to the home page, search options are to wide and if you make thesearch narrower you often get no options, ex. you want to rent something on theEastside...you get either the entire list or locations or just one to search you can't narrow itdown by area, district, along the river, near water, lake view, accessible to the elderly, seats500 you get the drift. Parameters that would be helpful

Does not work well enough

Access to the activities of MRPB

N/A



of 129


64%Importance


77%Usability


81%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied




MaintainDept. Users Imp.Planning & Project Mana... 12 64%




Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

8%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Manager

33%of user base

4Users

Critical 75% 77% 73% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have 25% 60% 70% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Front Line

58%of user base

7Users

Critical 57% 98% 88% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have 14% 50% 50% --%

Do not use 28% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

AutoDesk AutoCAD 19 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses



N/A


Good reliable software. Necessary for producing electronic construction drawings. I like it.

Would like more regular training and updates on AUTOCAD. It takes a lot to stay fluent in it.IT staff do not support it, we have no good technical support.

Essential - use to draw and alter plans, work with survey data, draw measurement-accuratedesigns. Most of our consultants deliver plans in AutoCAD. Difficult program to learn andretain without daily use, however. Could really use a Lynda.com account to practice thisprogram.

very slow to open and I have to turn off several automatic messages before I get to thedrawing.

I don't use this very much in my role, but generally need this CAD format because it's theindustry standard.


AutoDesk AutoCAD 19 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129


63%Importance


78%Usability


75%Features


79%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied



UpgradeDept. Users Imp.Customer Service 3 67%



Maintenance 7 62%



Environmental 6 67%




Finance 3 44%

ReassessDept. Users Imp.Human Resources 1 33%

Trades 1 --%

RetrainDept. Users Imp.Information Technology ... 8 92%


Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

12%of user base

14Users

Critical 21% 93% 90% 97%

Important 71% 79% 84% 88%

Nice to have 7% 80% 100% 80%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

29%of user base

35Users

Critical 31% 77% 79% 84%

Important 40% 76% 80% 82%

Nice to have 22% 61% 55% 59%

Do not use 5% --% --% --%

Front Line

59%of user base

70Users

Critical 31% 82% 81% 80%

Important 34% 80% 83% 85%

Nice to have 21% 62% 69% 68%

Do not use 14% 20% 40% 40%

Companyavg.

Numara Software Track-It! Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Contentious Retrain 92% 61% 71% 63% 8

Look up open and closed tickets and track some of my work.

I use this application all day everyday and it has the ability to be a valuable tool for theorganization. Unfortunately it is not utilized to its full potential. Data is unreliable ormissing creating additional work for staff.

Custom forms are not available to easily capture information. Approvals are not easilyavailable to managers.

The software itself is fairly standard in terms of a work order system - it handles statuses,assignments and notes well. Auto-populated fields are often inaccurate and online usersubmissions rarely include necessary details. Integrated submission forms for userrequests, id badge requests, mobile device requests, etc. would assist with streamliningthe workflow, and increasing the relevancy of Track-It. ITRC processes do not clearlyincorporate the use of Track-It when handling walk-in requests, phone calls or purchaserequests. It is doubtful that any call tracking system will manage the disjointed nature ofthe purchasing process, so Track-It's failure to do so is likely not unique in that regard.

Manage and organize requests and document problems

Helps keep track of the things we are working on. Requests that are put into other people,also helps with inventory of loaner items.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Nice to keep track of web requests and nice for staff to submit requests for web andother needs all in one place. Search feature internally is nice to have. Reportingcapabilities could be beefed up, but I've never had training on how to run reports - justtry them out here and there if I have time/have a need to.

The delay between when a ticket is sent and when it is received is annoying. Sometimestickets are sent to a strange folder.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


good for reports

fixing electronic issues

Very helpful. I.T. staff are always on top of things!

would be nice to put all the attached files on at the same time - isteand of adding themafter it has been sent.

Often times it's difficult to describe a problem. I am not very computer-savy so I don'tknow what the drop-down categories mean. Sometimes it takes 2-3 weeks to get aresponse and I don't know if someone is on vacation, or they're aware of the problem andworking on it. The help-desk and sending in emails used to work; I believe they've beenabandoned now though, right? There doesn't seem to be any consistency orcommunication to those of us in the field working afternoons and evenings.

nice

IT is efficient in responding to requests.

works well for me

Love the information it shares relating to assigned and resolved. Helps me track it as well.


Numara Software Track-It! Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129

no idea

I have been instructed not to use in my area

N/A

I find much success when I use Track-It please don't change this system!

Used before more not so much now

This has worked well for me.

This works well. Easy to navigate.

Used to enter IT repairs or requests

Great, use all the time for work order.

Very good tool and has help speed up the process and help fix any issues we have out inthe field

I use it whenever I need to. Choices in the drop down section can be a little more detailed.

Extremely useful for us to get issues or requests into IT to get resolved. At times, especiallywith more difficult tasks, it would be nice to get periodic updates if possible. I know it is notalways possible but at times we do not know where we are in the process or when it willget resolved...or even if it is possible to resolve.

Helps a lot with posting to the website

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Finance Unleveraged Maintain 44% 90% 85% 100% 3

Love this one. Very smart.....easy to use and fast.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Good for tracking work

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

CustomerService Contentious Upgrade 67% 70% 60% 70% 3

seldom use it as it is complicated

Need for work orders

Great for help and problems Updating Website Computer problems and equipment needsJanitorial

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


works

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


Don't use

helps speed up repair process



of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses



Easy to use

EASY TO USE and TRACK! EASY TO USE!

I have had reasonably good luck with this app

Does not have the fields needed. Webpage updates is the most common thing I do andthere is not a choice for that.

Use regularly to update web pages, request services. If I have an urgent question, I'll stopby the ITS office instead. Program is simple and good, only one glitch - it only lets youupload one file when creating a new ticket. You can add more later but have to open theticket and do it after the fact.

I use this mainly for webpage updates, so I expect my use of this will change with the newwebsite update.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

FacilityManagement Unleveraged Maintain 33% 83% 77% 80% 5

Do not use

If problems this has been really helpful

Seems to work fine

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

CommunityOutreach Unleveraged Maintain 48% 72% 75% 71% 9

What the department likes to use in the event of help.

Haven't used it yet

Important because of my department needs and requirements.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


I used this and like how well I can write up an order for a phone or computer problems.The process is good on how they respond.

Easy to use,

Helps get repairs done or problems solved in timely manner

Good communication with IT

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Trades Unwanted Reassess 0% 0% 0% 0% 1

n/a



of 129


60%Importance


83%Usability


76%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied




MaintainDept. Users Imp.Planning & Project Mana... 12 92%



Finance 3 78%

ReassessDept. Users Imp.Facility Management 5 33%

Facilities 1 --%

Police 2 --%

RetrainDept. Users Imp.Asset Management 7 33%


Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

12%of user base

5Users

Critical 40% 55% 70% --%

Important 20% --% --% --%

Nice to have 20% 70% 60% --%

Do not use 20% --% --% --%

Manager

29%of user base

12Users

Critical 25% 87% 87% --%

Important 25% 95% 90% --%

Nice to have 25% 53% 50% --%

Do not use 25% 60% --% --%

Front Line

60%of user base

25Users

Critical 40% 88% 94% --%

Important 28% 77% 73% --%

Nice to have 16% 90% 85% --%

Do not use 16% 10% --% --%

Companyavg.

Adobe Acrobat Professional 10 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


I only know the basics, but would really like everyone who creates PDFs to be required tohave training on how to make PDFs with fields you can fill out, submit directly online, andon creating accessible PDFs.


Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


helps ability to access pictures, articles, etc.

Doesn't always work

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

Facilities Unwanted Reassess 0% 0% 0% 0% 1

Don't use it.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

AssetManagement Unleveraged Retrain 33% 62% 80% 0% 7

Need it, don't have it.

Don't use

n/a

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses





I like this app as most imformation I send out has to be in PDF format. Good software app

Pdfs are becoming so common we should all have pro to edit and work with them.

Essential - use to resize, reformat, and edit pdfs, convert jpgs to pdfs. Cannot do this withsimple Adobe Reader. We constantly get pdfs we need to reformat, protect, or alter insome way, especially to put on web. I don't use it for creating forms.

Not sure if I have Acrobat Pro, but Acrobat, in general, is critical for transferring files andfor disseminating info to the public.

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

FacilityManagement Unwanted Reassess 33% 50% 0% 0% 5

Do not use

Don't use it so not knowledgeable about value

do not use

N/A


Adobe Acrobat Professional 10 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


I love being able to combine PDF files and making type-in forms. Makes it really easy forapplications and information forms.

This application is useful to me.


N/A

Adobe Acrobat Professional 10 Comments Application Feedback Program


of 129


58%Importance


41%Usability


36%Features


57%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied





ReassessDept. Users Imp.Information Technology ... 8 58%



Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

13%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Manager

25%of user base

2Users

Critical 50% 20% 40% 40%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 50% 10% 10% --%

Front Line

63%of user base

5Users

Critical 60% 57% 60% 63%

Important 20% 40% 50% 90%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 20% 10% 10% 20%

Companyavg.

ADEMCO PassPoint Plus 2.1 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


of 129


0%Importance


--%Usability


--%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied





ReassessDept. Users Imp.Customer Service 3 --%



Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

67%of user base

2Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Front Line

33%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

Adobe Photoshop Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 116 of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses

CustomerService Unwanted Reassess 0% 0% 0% 0% 3

N/A

Do not use.

NA


Adobe Photoshop Comments Application Feedback Program


Page 117 of 129


0%Importance


--%Usability


--%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied





ReassessDept. Users Imp.Trades 1 --%



Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

100%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Front Line

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

IBM M5 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 118 of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses Trades Unwanted Reassess 0% 0% 0% 0% 1

n/a


IBM M5 Comments Application Feedback Program


Page 119 of 129


0%Importance


60%Usability


80%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied



UpgradeDept. Users Imp.Environmental 6 --%





Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

17%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Front Line

83%of user base

5Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% 80% 60% --%

Companyavg.

USACE Flux32 Software for Load Estimation Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 120 of 129


0%Importance


--%Usability


--%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied





ReassessDept. Users Imp.Human Resources 1 --%



Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Front Line

100%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

Brother P-touch Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 121 of 129


0%Importance


60%Usability


80%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied








Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

17%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Front Line

83%of user base

5Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% 80% 60% --%

Companyavg.

USACE Bathtub Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 122 of 129


0%Importance


--%Usability


--%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied





ReassessDept. Users Imp.Trades 1 --%



Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

100%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Front Line

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

eVision Technologies Group mediaCAT 2013 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 123 of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses Trades Unwanted Reassess 0% 0% 0% 0% 1

n/a


eVision Technologies Group mediaCAT 2013 Comments Application Feedback Program


Page 124 of 129


0%Importance


--%Usability


--%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied








Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

67%of user base

2Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Front Line

33%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

AZ Loan Desk Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 125 of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


N/A

Do not use.

NA


AZ Loan Desk Comments Application Feedback Program


Page 126 of 129


0%Importance


60%Usability


80%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied








Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

17%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Front Line

83%of user base

5Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% 80% 60% --%

Companyavg.

USACE P8 Urban Catchment Model 3.4 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 127 of 129


0%Importance


--%Usability


--%Features


--%Data Quality





Feat

ures

Extr

emel

yD

issa

tisfie

dEx

trem

ely

Satis

fied








Seniority


Executive

--%of user base

0Users

Importance

LevelPercent of

UsersFeatures

Usability Data

Quality

Score

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Director

--%of user base

0Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use --% --% --% --%

Manager

67%of user base

2Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Front Line

33%of user base

1Users

Critical --% --% --% --%

Important --% --% --% --%

Nice to have --% --% --% --%

Do not use 100% --% --% --%

Companyavg.

Nero Essentials 7 Scorecard Application Feedback Program


Page 128 of 129

Status

Importance

Features

Usability Data

QualityResponses


N/A

Do not use.

NA


Nero Essentials 7 Comments Application Feedback Program


Page 129 of 129

application feedback 79% program complete

Documents