Financial Services Firms Again Seek to Renew

Making Leaders Successful Every Day

November 8, 2010

Financial Services Firms Again Seek To Renew Their Application Landscapeby Jost Hoppermannfor Application Development & Delivery Professionals

www.forrester.com

© 2010, Forrester Research, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized reproduction is strictly prohibited. Information is based on best available resources. Opinions reflect judgment at the time and are subject to change. Forrester®, Technographics®, Forrester Wave, RoleView, TechRadar, and Total Economic Impact are trademarks of Forrester Research, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. To purchase reprints of this document, please email [email protected]. For additional information, go to www.forrester.com.

For Application Development & Delivery Professionals

ExEcuTivE SummARyDuring the summer of 2010, Forrester surveyed 80 IT decision-makers in financial services (FS) firms in Europe, North America, and, for example, Australia, Japan, and South Africa. Our findings show that an overwhelming majority of firms have both budgets and plans to renew their application landscape and core banking platforms. While each region shares a similar interest in core banking, differences in how to serve various channels exist between North America and Europe. Huge budgets, many exceeding €100 million, present no obstacle for a bank’s or an insurance firm’s renewal plans. With the renewal train re-accelerating, financial services firms need to get their tickets soon to defend their competitive situation.

TAbLE oF coNTENTSIf You Have No Plans To Renew Your Application Landscape, You Are Alone

Key Drivers Accelerate The End Of Baroque Castles

Firms Seek Specific capabilities To Support Their Drivers

Funding Doesn’t Present An obstacle

Off-The-Shelf Apps’ Maturity Alleviates The Need For Custom Development

WHAT iT mEANS

Firms Need To Review Their Starting Point To Avoid New Baroque Castles

Supplemental Material

NoTES & RESouRcESForrester conducted the Q3 2010 Global Financial Services Architecture online Survey, a survey of iT decision-makers at 80 financial services companies in 23 countries, to get their take regarding their current situation and future plans for applications, application infrastructure, and iT infrastructure as well as their most urgent business pains.

Related Research Documents“Global banking Platform Deals 2009” may 28, 2010

“The banking Platform of The Future” December 8, 2009

“The Future Shape of banking Architecture in 2023” November 14, 2008

November 8, 2010

Financial Services Firms Again Seek To Renew Their Application LandscapeFindings From our Q3 2010 Global Financial Services Architecture online Surveyby Jost Hoppermannwith Kyle mcNabb, mike Gilpin, and Sander Rose

2

5

12

13

14

mailto:[email protected]

www.forrester.com

www.forrester.com

http://www.forrester.com/go?docid=56866&src=57039pdf




© 2010, Forrester Research, inc. Reproduction ProhibitedNovember 8, 2010

Financial Services Firms Again Seek To Renew Their Application Landscape For Application Development & Delivery Professionals

2

IF YOu HAvE NO PLANS TO RENEw YOuR APPLICATION LANDSCAPE, YOu ARE ALONE

Survey participants in a total of 15 European countries, Canada, and the US as well as, for example, Australia, Colombia, India, Japan, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa revealed their application landscape renewal plans (see Figure 1).1 Approximately 60% of firms have finished their renewal plans, are currently executing on them, or are planning to start them before the end of 2010; therefore, if you do not have plans ready before the end of 2010, your firm is in the minority (see Figure 2).2 Laggards, be aware that your application landscape more likely resembles an ancient edifice — a baroque castle — that has been repurposed over a long timeline than it does a purpose-built modern building. If you do not accept the renewal imperative, you may be putting your firm at a competitive disadvantage or facing a quick-and-dirty renewal approach that can lead to failure — or both.3

Figure 1 Participating Firms Represent The Financial Services industry

Source: Forrester Research, Inc.57039

“Where is your office located?”1-1

United Kingdom11%

Base: 80 IT decision-makers within financial services organizations(percentages do not total 100 because of rounding)

Source: Q3 2010 Global Financial Services Architecture Online Survey

Belgium3% Canada

9%Denmark

1%Finland

1%France

1%

Greece1% Ireland

1%

Netherlands1%

Norway3%

Poland1%Portugal

1%Sweden4%

Switzerland5%

USA34%

Other11%

Austria1%

Germany10%

© 2010, Forrester Research, inc. Reproduction Prohibited November 8, 2010


3

Figure 1 Participating Firms Represent The Financial Services industry (cont.)


“What is approximately the total amount of assets of your company as reported on the latestbalance sheet?”

1-2


All

N = 80

N = 37

Don’t know11%

More than€400 billion

18%

More than €100 billionand up to €400 billion

21%

Up to €10 billion14%

More than€10 billion and

up to €100 billion36%

Europe


More than €100billion and upto €400 billion

27%


18%

Don’t know11%


More than€10 billionand up to

€100 billion50%


22%


20%


19%

Don’t know9%

North America

N=34

(Rate of €1 = $1.238)

Base: IT decision-makers within financial services organizations



4

Figure 1 Participating Firms Represent The Financial Services industry (cont.)


“In what area does your financial services institution MAINLY operate?”1-3


Base: 80 IT decision-makers within financial services organizations

Retail banking39%

Universal banking16%

Corporate banking/wholesale banking

9%

Investment banking/capital markets

8%

Insuranceindustry

7%

Investmentmanagement

7%

Mortgagebanking/lending

3%Private banking

6%

Other5%



5

Figure 2 A majority of Firms Have begun or Have Plans To Renew Their Application Landscape


“When do you think your company will start a major renewal initiative regarding its financialservices platform (e.g., banking platform)?”


1%

41%

19%

8%

0%

13%

3%

46%

19%

8%

0%

5%

0%

35%

21%

19%19%

21%

6%

0%

18%

Alreadyfinished

No knownplans

North America, N = 34Europe, N = 37All, N = 80

Planning,start in 2015 to 2016



Planning,start in 2010

Currentlyexecuting

Base: IT decision-makers within financial services organizations(percentages may not total 100 because of rounding)

KEY DRIvERS ACCELERATE THE END OF BAROquE CASTLES

Before the crisis, many financial services companies gradually moved away from their individual baroque-castle application platforms, and fewer firms today have efforts underway than before the crisis.4 Yet nearly three-quarters of survey respondents told Forrester that they personally consider a major application renewal necessary to ensure that their firm can cope with current and future business and technology needs (see Figure 3).5

The key drivers, both technology and business oriented, of participating firms highlight the challenges existing application architectures have coping with the usual flood of business demands (see Figure 4). The old-fashioned, in some cases decades-old, banking applications cannot stand up



6

to a modern financial services firm’s daily life scenarios. Tomorrow’s platforms need to help firms quickly add a new channel or class of mobile devices, establish true cross-channel capability, and support new target geographies on short notice. Future platforms must also help firms change a financial services product or support an entirely new class of products while also supporting end-of-day processing in real time and coping with the latest set of new regulatory requirements. Our survey data highlights that:

· New platforms must step up to major business change. Most surveyed firms must cope with large-scale business change — often on a continuous basis. European financial services firms focus more on supporting business agility and flexibility. North American firms target managing changing markets, increasing market share, entering new markets, and better supporting competitive differentiation. Regardless, business flexibility and the related ability to cope with market change must be integral elements of any decision in favor of or against a given architecture or off-the-shelf banking platform.

· New platforms need to manage cost, support flexibility, and reduce time-to-market. Both North American and European regions show a strong focus on efficiency and cost management.6 Firms also want forward-looking technology and architecture — as a tool for flexibility — to improve business process automation, help cope with regulatory changes, and provide real-time views into information. Application delivery teams will need platforms to help streamline product cycle times to help address time-to-market and time-to-money drivers and help their firm get the right products to the right customers at the earliest possible moment.

· European and North American firms have different drivers for application renewal. European firms express a higher priority for customer experience needs. North American firms identify the risk of aged technology and applications as well as the risk of the retiring workforce and shrinking talent pool.7 This last, exotic business driver offers reasons to move away from the existing application landscape. However, even the latest application landscape in any firm cannot deal with these challenges entirely on its own; the retiring workforce challenge makes accompanying measures mandatory to avoid facing exactly the same problem when firms sunset future platforms.



7

Figure 3 Nearly Three-Quarters of Respondents believe Their Firm Needs A major Renewal


“Do you think your firm needs a major application renewal (AKA a transformation of its applicationlandscape) to cope with current and future business needs?”


Base: 80 IT decision-makers within financial services organizations

Yes71%

Don’t know5%

No24%

Figure 4 The Top Five Drivers For The Renewal of The Application Landscape



Base: IT decision-makers within financial services organizations

Europe North America

Business agility/flexibility/newbusiness capabilities

Changing markets, more di�erentiation,market share increaseCost efficiency/cost reduction

Risk of aged technology and applications (including workforce aspects)Time-to-market/time-to-money

Cost efficiency/cost reduction

Forward-looking technologyand architectureImproved customer experience/service/needsTime-to-market/time-to-money

“What are the three to five top business requirements drivingyour company’s renewal initiative?”

(Percentages refer to the number of respondents whorated this requirement in their top �ve)

Forward-looking technologyand architecture

48%

52%

30%

33%

44%

67%

52%

30%

56%

33%N = 34N = 37



8

Firms Seek Specific Capabilities To Support Their Drivers

Key focus areas for many enterprisewide initiatives include running transactions more efficiently, getting an enterprise view on customers and other business parties, capturing better information about customers, and serving customers more effectively across more channels. More specifically:

· Core applications remain the primary area of renewal. Most respondents recognize core banking as the initial focus area for application landscape renewal; core insurance applications topped the list of initial focal points for renewal for all six participating insurance firms (see Figure 5). The baroque state of many core applications justifies many firms making this the priority. Modern core apps can more easily support business flexibility, control costs, improve time-to-market, and help firms avoid the risk of aged technology. When core banking includes front-end support, even the customer experience and related aspects will see improvement.

· Architecture and infrastructure preparation take center stage for many. Forty-three percent of survey participants place high priority on building the architecture and application infrastructure to support their application landscape renewal. Drivers such as increasing business flexibility, coping with market change, speeding time-to-market, and incorporating clearly forward-looking technology and architecture all contribute to firms’ need for an architectural foundation that can provide the glue between the different bits and pieces of a multiyear transformation.

· Renewal efforts also focus on customer-oriented applications. Between 25% and 38% of all survey respondents identify customer-oriented applications as a focal point for renewal: Respondents identify branch advisory and sales, analytics, central customer/party data management, customer relationship management, and Internet banking as focus areas for renewal to better serve customers. Overall, these focus areas support most drivers, including the need for forward-looking technology.

· Mobile banking, multichannel enablement, and regulatory compliance vary by region. European respondents show a stronger interest in multichannel enablement — and, one hopes, in cross-channel capability — than their North American counterparts.8 North American firms place greater focus on the mobile channel, while Europe shows a slower uptake of mobile. Regulation has a stronger impact on North America than Europe today.



9

Figure 5 The Focal Points And capabilities Firms Are Seeking To Support Their Drivers



Analytics

Branch (advisory, sales)

Branch (tellers)Building the architecture/applicationinfrastructure supporting application

Central customer/party data management

Core banking applications

Core insurance applications

Customer relationship management

Fraud detection/anti-money laundering

Internet banking

Lending

Mobile banking

Multichannel enablement

Payments

Regulatory compliance

Remote advisory services

Risk management

Self-service/kiosks

Strategic enterprise management

Trade finance

Trading platforms (retail)

Trading platforms (capital markets)

Trading platforms (FX trading)

Treasury

Wealth management

Don’t know

Other

All, N = 80Europe, N = 37North America,N = 34

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%25%

“Which will be the initial focal points of your financial services platform?”

Base: IT decision-makers within financial services organizations(multiple responses accepted)



10

Funding Doesn’t Present An Obstacle

With the crisis in mind, it comes somewhat as a surprise that many of the surveyed financial services firms have accepted the renewal mandate in spite of large, and in some cases even enormous, budget estimates. Still, budget projections Forrester made back in 2005 show that some firms may be underestimating their budgets.9 Today, firms may prefer not to spend large budgets, but they have accepted the fact that enduring competitiveness demands an application landscape renewal:

· About half of the financial services companies expect a budget of €100 million or less. Most of the firms in this group have total assets of €100 billion and less.10 North American companies in this group hope for smaller budgets, while European firms expect greater spending (see Figure 6).

· Less than a quarter of the financial services firms expect three-digit million-euro budgets. Overall, global financial services heavyweights with total assets of more than €400 billion represent the majority within this group. While most members of this group believe their renewal budgets will be in the range of €100 to €150 million, a few firms do have renewal budgets exceeding €350 million. On average, North American firms expect larger budgets than their European peers in this group.

· Many do not yet have a complete view on budgets and costs. About a third of survey participants could not offer a budget estimate. This could either mean that these respondents have not yet been involved in budget estimates or that a budget estimate for the entire renewal initiative is not yet available. However, European banks participating in the survey are slightly more advanced on the renewal timeline than North American banks, and considerably more respondents from North American banks “do not know” yet.

More European firms have budget estimates available, and many expect large renewal budgets. European firms have slightly lower budget estimates this year than in Forrester’s 2007 survey.11 Thus, many if not most financial services firms will likely have to adjust their renewal budgets upward during the different stages of their application landscape renewal.12 Business executives would be well advised not to expect IT organizations to fully deliver these large-scale projects without any increase of the IT budget or with a shrinking one.



11

Figure 6 budget Estimates Exceed €350 million




Up to €10 million

More than €10 million and up to €50 million





More than €350 million

Don’t know


All, N = 80Europe, N = 37North America, N = 34

“What is approximately the budget approach for your renewal initiative(software, services and internal work e�ort)?”

4%3%3%

0%0%0%

5%5%

3%

3%0%

6%

10%14%

9%

13%19%

9%

18%24%

12%

18%14%

18%

31%22%

41%

(rate of €1 = $1.238)



12

OFF-THE-SHELF APPS’ MATuRITY ALLEvIATES THE NEED FOR CuSTOM DEvELOPMENT

In spite of the large and sometimes enormous budget estimates, firms seek to invest in ways that help them free up resources to support differentiating business areas without increasing their headcount. Just five years ago, most firms had to build applications from scratch, citing that off-the-shelf analytics were not as powerful as necessary, core banking did not scale up as far as needed or was not sufficiently flexible, risk management could not cope with local regulation needs, and central party data management was a dream for many banks.13 Today, off-the-shelf applications and complete integrated banking platforms can cope with much of a firm’s functional requirements. These software packages can even deliver cost-effective solutions if a firm is willing to accept 80% or 90% alignment of business requirements with a chosen solution.14 Survey responses show that FS firms have now broadly accepted the improved capabilities of off-the-shelf functionality, as:

· Pure in-house development lost relevance. Only 14% of survey participants say that their firm focuses on in-house development, using only a low share of off-the-shelf applications (see Figure 7). In Europe, more firms continue to move away from pure in-house development: The percentage of respondents who report that their firm focuses on in-house development dropped from 36% and 27% in 2005 and 2007, respectively.15

· Complete and integrated application suites win. Close to a quarter of survey participants, independent of the region, prefer a best-of-suite approach.16 These firms seek potential benefits associated with integrated functionality and data models, defined application architecture, and integration and customization frameworks. In addition, banking platforms can potentially act as a more business-oriented banking backbone that integrates with all kinds of satellite and peripheral applications if and when necessary.

· North American firms have a stronger preference for best-of-breed. Almost a third of surveyed North American firms indicate that they prefer an approach based on integration of best-in-class applications — while only about 14% of European respondents are in favor of this approach.17 We have spoken with many banks that support this type of approach with strong enterprisewide application architecture practices. Firms placing a higher priority on architecture and infrastructure renewal also indicate that they prefer this approach.18

· About a third of the surveyed firms seek a balance of in-house and off-the-shelf apps. This balanced approach can provide the ideal playground for what Forrester calls componentization — which at its very core supports effective and differentiating apps in a most productive way.19



13

Figure 7 in-House Development is Not The major Source of Functionality Anymore




All,N = 80

6% 24% 32% 35% 3%

Europe,N = 37 22% 24% 14% 41%

North America,N = 34

14% 24% 25% 36% 1%

Use mainly in-house developed applicationswith a low share of o�-the-shelf applications

Use mainly a complete suite of integrated applications(e.g., integrated banking platform) that provides onaverage best overall functionality (best-of-suite)

Use mainly best-in-class applicationso� the shelf and integrate

Use in-house and o�-the-shelfapplications equally and integrate

Don’t know

“What is the main IT strategic objective of your financial services institution regarding yourfinancial services platform (e.g., banking platforms)?”

W H A T i T m E A N S

FIRMS NEED TO REvIEw THEIR STARTINg POINT TO AvOID NEw BAROquE CASTLES

For the majority of financial services firms, and in particular banks, the move away from vintage application landscapes is mandatory for them to again become or to remain competitive. However, at least some of their approaches seem to directly point to more tactical — as opposed to strategic, enterprisewide — planning that can lead to the creation of the same baroque castles, this time built on modern technology. Avoiding this scenario requires that firms reconsider how to plan their platform transformation initiatives.20 What does this mean for app dev and delivery teams?

· Application landscape renewals will fail unless they are backed by sound planning. Firms that try to shortcut months- if not year-long planning phases and to work without broad coordination and governance too often pay with years of delay. Planners need to start with a strategic business perspective, mapping business functionality hot spots to off-the-shelf solutions, future custom-built apps, and existing solutions’ capabilities.21 continuous consideration of technology that comes into existence during the initiative also helps firms avoid creating a future application landscape built on technology that becomes obsolete as soon as the initiative is complete.



14

· Migration plans need continuous adjustment. Such plans need to define the individual migration steps, including the sequence of application retirements. Further, identification of functional hot spots helps ensure early delivery of high-value functionality and cuts through the Gordian knot of the application landscape to help identify migration steps.22 business change and an initiative’s multiyear character also make continuous adjustments mandatory. used in the right way, this approach ensures manageable complexity and risk.

· Application delivery in FS will see more off-the-shelf applications than in the past. Application development will focus on the most-differentiating business areas.23 Selecting off-the-shelf business functionality, integrating apps, and composing new differentiating functionality out of custom-built and off-the shelf functional building blocks (components) will represent a large share of the agenda. industrialization of financial services and componentization will become more and more important.24 App dev and delivery teams in financial services need to prepare for these scenarios, which will likely start to emerge during the migration and delivery phase of their renewal initiative.

SuPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Methodology

In particular during the planning and review phases of larger initiatives for the transformation or the renewal of a financial services firm’s application landscape, application development and delivery teams often ask Forrester about the plans and directions of comparable firms regarding banking platform renewal, the speed of renewal, project sizes, key application infrastructure building blocks, and related topics. The key question is “What are my peers doing?” To help these app delivery teams, Forrester fielded its Q3 2010 Global Financial Services Architecture Online Survey to IT decision-makers at 80 financial services companies in 23 countries to get their take regarding their current situation and future plans for applications, application infrastructure, and IT infrastructure as well as their most urgent business pains. Survey responses represent a broad set of financial services firms around the globe; many decision-makers in the FS platform and in particular the banking platform space will find themselves well represented. Respondent incentives included a copy of the finalized report.

ENDNOTES1 In 2004, Forrester predicted that many banks needed to transform their custom-built and off-the-shelf

banking platforms to renew their application landscape. The reasons were manifold and included insufficient ability to cope with cost and quality issues, urgent business requirements such as mergers and acquisitions, a continuously shortening time-to-market for new products, and the resulting strategic need for more-flexible business process support. The financial crisis caused a slowdown of renewal plans; the start of many initiatives got delayed, and business with off-the-shelf banking platforms slowed down globally. See the May 28, 2010, “Global Banking Platform Deals 2009” report, and see the August 19, 2010,

“Global Banking Platform Deals 2009: Regions And Functionality” report.





15

2 Financial services firms that are neither already renewing nor planning to do so need to recognize that there is no way around application renewal. See the July 8, 2005, “Application Renewal Goes Mainstream” report.

3 The ancient constructs of baroque castles are not up to the quality, cost, and time-to-delivery requirements of modern banks. Consequently, an increasing number of banks and other financial services firms are heading toward the renewal of their application landscape. See the April 30, 2007, “Topic Overview: Banking Platforms” report.

4 For example, comparing 2007 and 2010 data shows that in 2010 fewer European firms are working on renewing their application landscape and more are in different stages of planning. See the November 13, 2007, “European Financial Services Apps Show New Focus And Pace” report.

5 The majority of those who do not see this as a necessity are located in Europe. However, even within this more skeptical group, the vast majority of respondents are already executing their renewal initiative or planning to do so.

6 It is important to note that while cost reduction was a key business driver, cost reduction was not the key business driver to which all other business drivers were subordinated. The survey data shows that cost reduction was not even a key business driver for all surveyed firms.

7 This topic is a top 10 topic in Europe but without any workface ingredients.

8 Given the lack of strong interest in multichannel enablement, North American banks need to avoid creating channel islands: isolated channels without any cross-channel capability. In addition, the strong customer relationship management (CRM) focus could indicate the existence of a CRM dilemma — insufficient separation of CRM business functionality and potentially existing CRM multichannel capabilities. Confusing these two elements will activate the “few-channel trap” of some CRM solutions that have never been designed to act as a complete multichannel solution — and thus cannot provide cross-channel capability.

9 Typical budgets for smaller banks are in the €20 million range; global tier one banks showed budgets of up to €250 million. See the October 11, 2005, “Banking Platform Renewal: Sizing The Market” report.

10 Survey responses offered euro as well as USD responses (where applicable), using an exchange rate of €1 to $1.238. However, for the sake of clarity as well as to ensure comparability with previous financial services surveys, this report translated all responses into euros.

11 Application renewal budgets are tremendous. See the November 13, 2007, “European Financial Services Apps Show New Focus And Pace” report.

12 During the development, implementation, and migration phase, costs will probably increase rather than decrease. See the July 8, 2005, “Application Renewal Goes Mainstream” report.

13 Build or buy decisions are based on a variety of factors. See the November 29, 2004, “End Of The Line For Vintage Banking Platforms” report.

14 Requirements can be mandatory or nice to have. See the March 8, 2005, “Large-Scale Banking Platform Renewal Case Study: Drivers” report.















16

15 Significant numbers of financial services form focus mainly or purely on in-house development, while only a minority of FS firms focus on complete suites of integrated financial services applications.

16 This stands in stark contrast to previous surveys in which only 13% of the European participants expressed interest in this approach.

17 Regional differences are huge: Compared with European survey responses, more than twice as many North American survey responses belong into this group, while Europe has shown a 13% to 15% share during the course of the past two surveys.

18 Lasting renewal success requires planning methodology, architecture, and application infrastructure that support renewal and migration. See the December 14, 2005, “European Financial Services: Top Five Areas For Renewal — And Why They Make Sense” report.

19 Once the functionality has been componentized, banking platform vendors and banking software specialists will offer it as flexible bundles of services. See the December 8, 2009, “The Banking Platform Of The Future” report.

20 New systems do not offer long-term advantage without radical change in methodology and technology. See the November 14, 2008, “The Future Shape Of Banking Architecture In 2023” report.

21 A business capability map will provide a sound foundation for this kind of activity. See the February 16, 2010, “Bank EAs: Start Working With A Customized Business Capability Map” report.

22 A dedicated migration architecture will help firms avoid some pitfalls. A company in a Forrester case study was able to identify those function cuts and resulting migration steps that minimized the impact of retiring applications and substituted them with new functionality with regard to functional and data interdependencies. See the March 15, 2005, “Large-Scale Banking Platform Renewal Case Study: Target And Migration” report.

23 This represents a huge difference from the past, when even apps supporting routine activities tended to be homegrown systems in financial services.

24 Componentization is the availability of manageable bundles of off-the-shelf and custom-built services with a fit-to-purpose functional footprint. See the December 8, 2009, “The Banking Platform Of The Future” report.










Forrester Research, Inc. (Nasdaq: FORR)

is an independent research company

that provides pragmatic and forward-

thinking advice to global leaders in

business and technology. Forrester

works with professionals in 19 key roles

at major companies providing

proprietary research, customer insight,

consulting, events, and peer-to-peer

executive programs. For more than 27

years, Forrester has been making IT,

marketing, and technology industry

leaders successful every day. For more

information, visit www.forrester.com.

Headquarters

Forrester Research, Inc.

400 Technology Square

Cambridge, MA 02139 USA

Tel: +1 617.613.6000

Fax: +1 617.613.5000

Email: [email protected]

Nasdaq symbol: FORR

www.forrester.com

m a k i n g L e a d e r s S u c c e s s f u l E v e r y D a y

57039

For information on hard-copy or electronic reprints, please contact Client Support

at +1 866.367.7378, +1 617.613.5730, or [email protected].

We offer quantity discounts and special pricing for academic and nonprofit institutions.

For a complete list of worldwide locationsvisit www.forrester.com/about.

Research and Sales Offices

Forrester has research centers and sales offices in more than 27 cities

internationally, including Amsterdam; Cambridge, Mass.; Dallas; Dubai;

Foster City, Calif.; Frankfurt; London; Madrid; Sydney; Tel Aviv; and Toronto.

www.forrester.com

mailto:[email protected]