January 30, 2017
Dresner Advisory Services, LLC
2017 Edition
Location Intelligence Market
Study
Wisdom of Crowds® Series
Licensed to Qlik
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Disclaimer:
This report is for informational purposes only. You should make vendor and product selections based on
multiple information sources, face-to-face meetings, customer reference checking, product demonstrations,
and proof-of-concept applications.
The information contained in this Wisdom of Crowds® Location Intelligence Business Intelligence Market
Study Report is a summary of the opinions expressed in the online responses of individuals that chose to
respond to our online questionnaire and does not represent a scientific sampling of any kind. Dresner
Advisory Services, LLC shall not be liable for the content of this report, the study results, or for any damages
incurred or alleged to be incurred by any of the companies included in the report as a result of the report’s
content.
Reproduction and distribution of this publication in any form without prior written permission is forbidden.
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 2
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Definitions
Business Intelligence Defined
Business intelligence (BI) is “knowledge gained through the access and analysis of
business information.”
Business Intelligence tools and technologies include query and reporting, OLAP (online
analytical processing), data mining and advanced analytics, end-user tools for ad hoc
query and analysis, and dashboards for performance monitoring.
Howard Dresner, The Performance Management Revolution: Business Results Through
Insight and Action (John Wiley & Sons, 2007)
Location Intelligence Defined
Location Intelligence is a form of business intelligence where the dominant dimension
used for analysis is location or geography. Most typically, though not exclusively,
analyses are conducted by viewing data points overlaid onto an interactive map
interface.
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 3
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Contents
Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 3
Business Intelligence Defined ...................................................................................... 3
Location Intelligence Defined ....................................................................................... 3
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 6
About Howard Dresner and Dresner Advisory Services .................................................. 7
About Jim Ericson ........................................................................................................... 8
Focus of Research .......................................................................................................... 9
Benefits of the Study ..................................................................................................... 10
Consumer Guide ........................................................................................................ 10
Supplier Tool .............................................................................................................. 10
External Awareness ................................................................................................ 10
Internal Planning ..................................................................................................... 10
Survey Method and Data Collection .............................................................................. 11
Data Quality ............................................................................................................... 11
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 12
Study Demographics ..................................................................................................... 13
Geography ................................................................................................................. 13
Functions ................................................................................................................... 14
Vertical Industries ...................................................................................................... 15
Organization Size....................................................................................................... 16
Analysis of Findings ...................................................................................................... 17
Importance of Location Intelligence ........................................................................... 17
Level of Geographic Detail Required ......................................................................... 24
Prioritized Geocoding Features.................................................................................. 29
Location Intelligence Users ........................................................................................ 35
Location Intelligence Features ................................................................................... 39
Location Intelligence User Penetration ...................................................................... 45
Cloud-Based Versus On-Premises Deployment of Location Intelligence ................... 51
User Devices Where Location Intelligence Will Be Utilized ........................................ 56
Mobile Location Intelligence Features ........................................................................ 61
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 4
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Required Integration with GIS Vendors ...................................................................... 66
Industry Support for Location Intelligence ..................................................................... 72
Industry Support for Geocoding ................................................................................. 73
Industry Support for Location Intelligence Features ................................................... 75
Industry Support for Third-Party GIS Platforms.......................................................... 77
Industry Support for Mobile Location Intelligence Features ....................................... 78
Demand versus Supply Priorities for Location Intelligence ........................................ 80
Location Intelligence Vendor Ratings ............................................................................ 81
Other Dresner Advisory Services Research Reports .......Error! Bookmark not defined.
Appendix: Location Intelligence Survey Instrument ....................................................... 83
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 5
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Introduction
This year we celebrate the tenth anniversary of Dresner Advisory Services! Our thanks
to all of you for your continued support and ongoing encouragement.
Since our founding in 2007, we have worked hard to set the “bar” high—challenging
ourselves to innovate and lead the market—offering ever greater value with each
successive year.
Our first market report in 2010 set the stage for where we are today. Since that time, we
have expanded our agenda and have added new research topics every year. For 2017,
we plan to release 15 major reports, including our original BI flagship report—in its
eighth year of publication!
Location intelligence has been somewhat of a “sleeper” topic for the past few years.
However, when we started coverage in 2014, we saw the potential for it to become
mainstream. As is the case with any topic, it takes several years of study to discern real
trends. With the growth in visualization and the emergence of IoT, location as a key
dimension and maps as a means of displaying and navigating insights have become
increasingly important.
As you read this report consider how location intelligence might be exploited or
expanded in your organization to improve your understanding of customers, markets,
assets, etc.
We hope you enjoy this report!
Best,
Chief Research Officer
Dresner Advisory Services
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 6
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
About Howard Dresner and Dresner Advisory Services
The DAS Location Intelligence Market Study was conceived, designed and executed by
Dresner Advisory Services, LLC—an independent advisory firm—and Howard Dresner,
its President, Founder and Chief Research Officer.
Howard Dresner is one of the foremost thought leaders in business intelligence and
performance management, having coined the term “Business Intelligence” in 1989. He
has published two books on the subject, The Performance
Management Revolution – Business Results through Insight
and Action (John Wiley & Sons, Nov. 2007) and Profiles in
Performance – Business Intelligence Journeys and the
Roadmap for Change (John Wiley & Sons, Nov. 2009). He
lectures at forums around the world and is often cited by the
business and trade press.
Prior to Dresner Advisory Services, Howard served as chief
strategy officer at Hyperion Solutions and was a research fellow at Gartner, where he
led its business intelligence research practice for 13 years.
Howard has conducted and directed numerous in-depth primary research studies over
the past two decades and is an expert in analyzing these markets.
Through the Wisdom of Crowds® Business Intelligence market research reports, we
engage with a global community to redefine how research is created and shared. Other
research reports include:
-
Advanced and Predictive Analytics
Big Data Analytics
Business Intelligence Competency Center
Cloud Computing and Business Intelligence
Collective Insights®
End User Data Preparation
Enterprise Planning
Natural Language Analytics
Small and Mid-Sized Enterprise BI
Howard conducts a weekly Twitter “tweetchat” on Fridays at 1:00 p.m. ET. During these
live events the #BIWisdom “tribe” discusses a wide range of business intelligence
topics.
You can find more information about Dresner Advisory Services at
www.dresneradvisory.com.
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 7
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
About Jim Ericson
Jim Ericson is a research director with Dresner Advisory Services.
Jim has served as a consultant and journalist who studies end-user management
practices and industry trending in the data and information management fields.
From 2004 to 2013 he was the editorial director at Information Management magazine
(formerly DM Review), where he created architectures for user and
industry coverage for hundreds of contributors across the breadth of
the data and information management industry.
As lead writer he interviewed and profiled more than 100 CIOs,
CTOs, and program directors in a 2010-2012 program called “25
Top Information Managers.” His related feature articles earned
ASBPE national bronze and multiple Mid-Atlantic region gold and
silver awards for Technical Article and for Case History feature
writing.
A panelist, interviewer, blogger, community liaison, conference co-chair, and speaker in
the data-management community, he also sponsored and co-hosted a weekly podcast
in continuous production for more than five years.
Jim’s earlier background as senior morning news producer at NBC/Mutual Radio
Networks and as managing editor of MSNBC’s first Washington, D.C. online news
bureau cemented his understanding of fact-finding, topical reporting, and serving broad
audiences.
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 8
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Focus of Research
In this study, we address key location intelligence issues including:





Perceptions and intentions surrounding location intelligence
End-user requirements and features:
o Geocoding support
o Location intelligence capabilities
o Third-party GIS integration
o Mobile location intelligence features
Industry support for location intelligence
User requirements versus industry capabilities
Vendor ratings
.
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 9
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Benefits of the Study
The DAS Location Intelligence Market Study provides a wealth of information and
analysis, offering value to both consumers and producers of business intelligence
technology and services.
Consumer Guide
As an objective source of industry research, consumers use the DAS Location
Intelligence Market Study to understand how their peers leverage and invest in location
intelligence and related technologies.
Using our unique vendor performance measurement system, users glean key insights
into BI software supplier performance, which enables:


Comparisons of current vendor performance to industry norms
Identification and selection of new vendors
Supplier Tool
Vendor licensees use the DAS Location Intelligence Market Study in several important
ways:
External Awareness


Build awareness for business intelligence markets and supplier brands, citing
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study trends and vendor performance
Gain lead and demand generation for supplier offerings through association with
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study brand, findings, webinars, etc.
Internal Planning



Refine internal product plans and align with market priorities and realities as
identified in the DAS Location Intelligence Market Study
Better understand customer priorities, concerns, and issues
Identify competitive pressures and opportunities
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 10
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Survey Method and Data Collection
As with all of our Wisdom of Crowds® Market Studies, we constructed a survey
instrument to collect data and used social media and crowdsourcing techniques to
recruit participants. Data for this report was collected between July and October of
2016.
Data Quality
We carefully scrutinized and verified all respondent entries to ensure that only qualified
participants were included in the study.
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 11
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Executive Summary











Among 30 topics under study, location intelligence ranks 20th, below traditional
topics but ahead of "hot" topics including big data and IoT (p. 17).
More than half of respondents consider location intelligence "critical" or "very
important” (p. 18). The perceived importance of location intelligence has
increased over time and appears to be gaining new traction (pp. 19-23). Industry
perceived importance is also strong (p. 72). Overall vendor sentiment is only
somewhat in line with user expectations over time (p. 80).
Postal code and province/state are the most important levels of detail for users.
Over time, granularity of detail is increasingly important (pp. 24-28).
The most important geocoding user features are native geocoding, automated
geocoding and street-level support. Feature interest has grown over time (pp. 2934). Industry support for features is only somewhat aligned (pp. 73-74); some
features in decline have shifted to third-party integration versus core integration.
Managers are the most targeted users of location intelligence across functions
and organizations of different sizes (pp. 35-38).
The most important location intelligence user features are map-based
visualization, drill-down navigation, and dashboards. Feature interest grew
sharply among users in 2017 (pp. 39-44). Industry feature support is good across
leading features (pp. 75-76).
Location intelligence penetration remains modest. We have seen modest growth
over time, and respondents describe significant growth plans (pp. 45-50).
Respondents are more likely to prefer on-premises deployments, but are clearly
not daunted by the prospects for cloud-based deployments. (pp. 51-55).
Desktops and laptops are the most popular devices for using location
intelligence, well ahead of mobile phones and tablets (pp. 56-60).
Among mobile location intelligence features, query filtering is the top choice and
well ahead of reverse geocoding and geofence alerting (pp. 61-65). Industry
support is aligned with user priorities but is immature (pp. 78-79).
The importance of GIS vendor integration with Esri and database extensions has
increased, while integration with Google has become less important (pp. 66-71).
Vendors have trended GIS integration support in line with user expectations (p.
77).
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 12
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Study Demographics
Our survey base includes a cross-section of data across geographies, functions,
organization sizes, and vertical industries. We believe that, unlike other industry
research, we offer a more characteristic sample and better indicator of true market
dynamics.
We constructed cross-tab analyses using these demographics to identify and illustrate
important industry trends.
Geography
In our 2017 sample, 64 percent of respondents represent North American organizations
(including five Canadian provinces and a majority of U.S. states). About one-quarter
represent EMEA and about 9 percent work in Asia Pacific (fig. 1).
Geographies Represented
70.0%
63.8%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
24.6%
20.0%
8.7%
10.0%
2.8%
0.0%
North America
Europe, Middle East and
Africa
Asia Pacific
Figure 1 – Geographies represented
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 13
Latin America
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Functions
IT accounts for the largest group of respondents (31 percent) by function. Twenty-two
percent come from the business intelligence competency center (BICC) and 11 percent
from executive management. Finance, R&D, and Marketing/Sales are the next most
represented (fig. 2).
Tabulating results by function enables us to compare and contrast the plans and
priorities of different departments within organizations.
Functions Represented
40%
35%
31.3%
30%
25%
22.7%
20%
15%
11.4%
10%
9.7%
7.3%
7.1%
5%
2.6%
0%
Figure 2 – Functions represented
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 14
1.0%
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Vertical Industries
Vertical industry participation in 2017 is well distributed and led by technology (13
percent) followed by financial services (10 percent), healthcare, and consulting (9
percent each. We encourage the participation of consultants; they often have deeper
industry knowledge than their customer counterparts. Third-party relationships give us
insight into the partner ecosystem for BI vendors (fig. 3).
Vertical Industries Represented
20%
18%
16%
14%
15%
13%
12%
10%
8%
6%
10%
9%
9%
7%
6%
5% 5%
4%
3%
4%
2%
2% 2% 2%
2% 2% 1%
1% 1% 1% 1%
0%
Figure 3 – Vertical industries represented
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 15
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Organization Size
Our survey sample is well distributed across organizations of different sizes (fig. 4).
Twenty-eight percent come from small (1-100 employees) organizations, 28 percent
represent mid-size (101-1,000 employees) organizations, and the remaining 44 percent
represent large organizations of 1,000 or more employees.
Segmenting respondents by organization size helps us identify differences in behavior,
attitudes, and planning.
Organization Sizes Represented
40%
35%
30%
27.9%
27.9%
25%
21.7%
22.5%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
1 - 100
101 - 1000
1001 - 5000
Figure 4 – Organization sizes represented
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 16
More than 5000
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Analysis of Findings
In this fourth annual Location Intelligence Market Study, we examine the nature of
location intelligence, exploring user sentiment and perceptions, the nature of current
implementations, and plans for the future.
Importance of Location Intelligence
Among 30 topics under study in 2017, location intelligence ranks 20th, atop the lower
third among technologies and initiatives strategic to business intelligence (fig. 5).
Location intelligence interest trails traditional topics including reporting, dashboards,
end-user self-service, and data visualization, but is ahead of other familiar topics that
include big data, social media analysis and the Internet of Things. As a relatively mature
BI-related topic, we believe organizations are generally acquainted with location
intelligence regardless of its penetration in a given organization.
Technologies and Initiatives Strategic to Business Intelligence
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Reporting
Dashboards
End-user "self-service"
Advanced visualization
Data discovery
Data warehousing
Data mining, advanced algorithms, predictive
Integration with operational processes
Data storytelling
Enterprise planning/budgeting
Mobile device support
Embedded BI (contained within an application,…
Governance
Collaborative support for group-based analysis
End-user data preparation and blending
Search-based interface
Software-as-a-Service and cloud computing
In-memory analysis
Ability to write to transactional applications
Location intelligence/analytics
Big data (e.g., Hadoop)
Pre-packaged vertical/functional analytical…
Text analytics
Streaming data analysis
Open source software
Social media analysis (Social BI)
Cognitive BI (e.g., Artificial Intelligence-based BI)
Complex event processing (CEP)
Internet of Things (IoT)
Edge computing
Figure 5 – Technologies and initiatives strategic to business intelligence
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 17
100%
Critical
Very important
Important
Somewhat
important
Not important
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
The majority of respondents have a high estimation of the importance of location
intelligence in 2017 (fig. 6). More than half consider the topic to be "critically important"
or "very important.” Another 30 percent say location intelligence is, at minimum,
"somewhat important.” Just 6 percent say it is "not important;" this finding is increasingly
positive year over year
Importance of Location Intelligence
Not important, 6%
Critically important,
20%
Somewhat
important, 30%
Very important, 43%
Figure 6 – Importance of location intelligence
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 18
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
The perceived importance of location intelligence has increased across four years of
study and experienced a notable spike in interest in 2017 (fig. 7). While earlier studies
reflect a level of "stickiness," our latest finding indicates location intelligence might be
gaining new traction among BI adherents as more sources of data have come online.
Nonetheless, we expect prospects for location intelligence will vary strongly from
organization to organization. In 2017, a mean of 2.75 places overall importance toward
a level of "important."
Importance of Location Intelligence
2014 to 2017
100%
4.00
90%
3.50
80%
3.00
70%
2.50
60%
Not important
Somewhat important
50%
2.00
40%
1.50
30%
1.00
20%
0.50
10%
0%
0.00
2014
2015
2016
2017
Figure 7 – Importance of location intelligence 2014 to 2016
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 19
Very important
Critical
Mean
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
We would generally expect respondents that deal with the “outside world” to value
location intelligence more than internal or back-office functions. In 2017, however, the
highest level of criticality (>3.0 = "important") is found in R&D, indicating that, in many
cases, location intelligence may still be in a proof-of-concept stage (fig. 8). Executive
Management, always on the lookout for new revenue and efficiency opportunities, is
next most interested in location intelligence.
Importance of Location Intelligence
by Function
100%
4
90%
3.5
80%
70%
3
60%
50%
2.5
Critically important
Very important
40%
2
30%
Somewhat important
Not important
20%
1.5
10%
0%
1
Research and Executive
Information
Business
Development Management Technology Intelligence
(R&D)
(IT)
Competency
Center
Marketing
and Sales
Finance
Figure 8 – Importance of location intelligence by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 20
Mean
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
In 2017, North America reports the highest mean interest in location intelligence,
followed by EMEA and Asia Pacific (fig. 9). One-quarter of North American respondents
say location intelligence is "critical;" about 70 percent of North America and EMEA
respondents say location intelligence is, at minimum, "very important." In all cases, we
expect opportunity, as well as culture and custom, will be determinants of the adoption
of location intelligence.
Importance of Location Intelligence
by Geography
100%
4
90%
3.5
80%
70%
3
60%
Critically important
50%
2.5
Very important
Somewhat important
40%
Not important
2
30%
20%
1.5
10%
0%
1
North America
Asia Pacific
Europe, Middle East
and Africa
Figure 9 – Importance of location intelligence by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 21
Mean
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
The perceived importance of location intelligence is somewhat consistent across
organizations of different sizes (fig. 10). Small organizations, most flexible to adopting
enterprise change through technology experimentation, are the least likely to view
location intelligence as "not important" and are more likely than mid-sized (101-1,000
employees) organizations to find location intelligence "critical." Among large
organizations (>1,000 employees), measures of "critical" importance are highest at
organizations with between 1,001 and 5,000 employees.
Importance of Location Intelligence
by Organization Size
100%
4
90%
3.5
80%
70%
3
Critically important
60%
Very important
50%
2.5
Somewhat important
Not important
40%
2
30%
20%
1.5
10%
0%
1
1 - 100
101 - 1000
1001 - 5000
More than 5000
Figure 10 – Importance of location intelligence by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 22
Mean
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across industries, the perceived importance of location intelligence in 2017 is highest in
Energy and in Transportation (fig. 11). These findings are intuitive, given these
industries' historical and ongoing management of remote assets as well as those in
transit. (We are surprised to see state and local governments trailing the industry
category, given mandates for the same concerns.) Financial services and
Telecommunications are the next most likely candidates, given high volumes of remote
transactions / data transfers. Healthcare demonstrates interest in location-centric uses
from population health to asset tracking, and Retail/wholesale has obvious interest in
merchandising optimization and other concerns.
Importance of Location Intelligence
by Industry
100%
4
90%
3.5
80%
70%
3
60%
50%
2.5
40%
Critically important
Very important
2
30%
Somewhat important
Not important
20%
1.5
10%
0%
1
Figure 11 – Importance of location intelligence by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 23
Mean
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Level of Geographic Detail Required
The granularity or level of geographic detail that respondents find important speaks to
the business processes or analysis related to location intelligence. Postal codes or
countries, for example, are useful to supply chain or fulfillment but also to sales region
performance or demographics. Latitudinal/longitudinal or custom geographies (less
related to a physical address) are important assets for discovery/recovery, natural
resources, wellheads, or unmarked boundaries.
Respondents are interested in and/or pursuing activity across a range of marked,
unmarked, and virtual location parameters (fig. 12). In 2017, conventional demarcations,
led by postal code and province/state, are considered critical or very important to more
than 70 percent of respondents. Country-level detail, like postal codes are "critical" to
about 45 percent of respondents. Latitude/longitude is next most important, after which
criticality drops among custom demarcations.
Level of Geographic Detail
100%
4
90%
3.5
80%
70%
3
60%
50%
2.5
40%
2
30%
20%
1.5
10%
0%
1
Critical
Very important
Somewhat important
Not important
Mean
Figure 12 – Level of geographic detail
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 24
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across four years of study, nearly all requirements for location intelligence levels of
detail (granularity) increased significantly (fig. 13). In 2017, postal codes show the
greatest year-over-year increase and moved ahead of province/state and country to
become the most required level of location detail. Latitude/longitude and custom
geographies saw the next most significant gains, indicating increasing support for
organization-specific granular location requirements.
Level of Geographic Detail Required 2014 to 2017
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
2014
1.5
2015
1
2016
2017
Figure 13 – Level of geographic detail required 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 25
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
By function, interest in postal codes is well clustered and led by Marketing and Sales
(fig. 14). In contrast, Marketing and Sales respondents are notably disinterested in less
granular levels of detail that cannot support customer micro-targeting by address or
other demographics. R&D respondents lead interest in province/state, country and
physical plant-level detail, while IT is distinctly most interested in latitude/longitude and
leads interest in custom geographies.
Level of Geographic Detail by Function
Postal code
4
3.5
Virtual worlds
3
Province or state
2.5
2
1.5
1
Physical store, plant,
office or other work
facility
Country
Custom geography
Latitude/Longitude
Executive Management
Marketing and Sales
Information Technology (IT)
Finance
Business Intelligence Competency Center
Research and Development (R&D)
Figure 14 – Level of geographic detail by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 26
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
In our 2017 sample, mid-sized (101-1,000 employees) organizations express the most
interest in postal code, province/state, and country-level detail (fig. 15). Very large
organizations with more than 5,000 employees tend to focus more on physical assets,
custom geographies, and latitude/longitude.
Level of Geographic Detail by Organization Size
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1 - 100
1.5
101 - 1000
1
1001 - 5000
More than 5000
Figure 15 – Level of geographic detail by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 27
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
By industry, Retail/wholesale has the greatest interest in postal codes (fig. 16). Along
with physical store-level detail, this relates to retail interest in inventory management as
well as opportunities in Marketing/Sales noted earlier (fig. 14, p. 26). As we might well
expect, Energy (with far-flung fixed wellhead and moving assets) reports the greatest
interest in latitude/longitude and custom geographies as well as province/state level.
Manufacturing respondents are most interested in country-level detail/codes.
Level of Geographic Detail by Industry
Postal code
4
3.5
Virtual worlds
3
Province or state
2.5
2
1.5
1
Physical store, plant,
office or other work
facility
Country
Custom geography
Latitude/Longitude
Healthcare
Business services
Financial services
Education
Energy
Manufacturing
Retail and wholesale
State and local government
Transportation
Figure 16 – Level of geographic detail by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 28
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Prioritized Geocoding Features
Consistent with our earlier studies, 2017 respondents place the greatest importance (44
percent "critical" and 39 percent "very important") on built-in or native geocoding (fig.
17). (This feature presumes that software has an understanding of geography detail
"baked in.") About 67 percent of respondents say automated geocoding (in which
software automatically recognizes geographic data elements, for example, address) is
critical or very important. Street-level geocoding is critical or very important to 60
percent of respondents. (This requirement assumes the software can cross-reference
latitude/longitude and street-level address.) While interest in customer extensions,
offline, and worldwide support trails off, these features are nonetheless critical or very
important to large minorities of respondents.
Prioritized Geocoding Features
Built-in (native) geocoding (e.g., country, region,
postal code, CBSA)
Automated geocoding support
Street-level geocoding support
Customer extensions to map data (e.g., custom
POIs)
Offline geocoding support
Worldwide geocoding support
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Critical
Very important
Somewhat important
Not important
Figure 17 – Prioritized geocoding features
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 29
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Year-over-year interest in geocoding increased noticeably across all measures in 2017
(fig. 18).The gains were greatest for built-in geocoding (which rose above 3.0 to a level
of "important") and automated geocoding support (which moved past street-level
support in 2017). (Automated support would include features like logic and a dictionary
to impute details from, for example, a street address or latitude/longitude entry without
additional manipulation or input.)
Prioritized Geocoding Features 2014 to 2017
4
3.5
3
2.5
2014
2015
2016
2
2017
1.5
1
Built-in (native) Street-level
geocoding
geocoding
(e.g., country,
support
region, postal
code, CBSA)
Automated
geocoding
support
Customer
extensions to
map data (e.g.,
custom POIs)
Offline
geocoding
support
Figure 18 – Prioritized geocoding features 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 30
Worldwide
geocoding
support
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
As with cumulative prioritization, the most prioritized feature by function in 2017 is builtin or native geocoding, where Marketing and Sales again lead interest (fig. 19). IT
edges out Marketing/Sales interest in automated geocoding support; IT is also most
interested in street-level geocoding and offline support. R&D leads interest in the
remaining features (customer extensions, worldwide support), indicating customer
demand is incipient or unsupported in these areas.
Prioritized Geocoding Features by Function
Worldwide geocoding support
Built-in (native) geocoding (e.g.,
country, region, postal code,
CBSA)
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Offline geocoding support
Automated geocoding support
Street-level geocoding support
Customer extensions to map data
(e.g., custom POIs)
Information Technology (IT)
Research and Development (R&D)
Business Intelligence Competency Center
Marketing and Sales
Executive Management
Finance
Figure 19 – Prioritized geocoding features by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 31
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Organizations in different geographies (led by EMEA) all place the highest priority on
built-in or native geocoding against country, region, or postal code information (fig. 20).
At a glance, interest in geocoding features is generally highest in Asia Pacific, followed
by North America and EMEA. Asia Pacific also reports markedly greater interest than
other regions in customer extensions, offline support, and worldwide geocoding support.
Street-level geocoding is the only feature preferred by North America over other
regions.
Prioritized Geocoding Features by Geography
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Built-in (native)
geocoding (e.g.,
country, region,
postal code,
CBSA)
Automated
geocoding
support
North America
Street-level
geocoding
support
Asia Pacific
Customer
extensions to
map data (e.g.,
custom POIs)
Offline
geocoding
support
Worldwide
geocoding
support
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Figure 20 – Prioritized geocoding features by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 32
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Organizations of different sizes consistently place the highest priority on built-in or
native geocoding against country, region, or postal code information (fig. 21). In 2017,
mid-sized (101-1,000 employees) organizations have the most interest in built-in
geocoding and automated geocoding support. Large (1,001-5,000 employees) and very
large (>5,000 employees) organizations show the greatest interest in customer
extensions, offline support, and worldwide geocoding support. Generally speaking,
organization size does not play an overly large role in interest in geocoding features.
Prioritized Geocoding Features by Organization Size
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Built-in (native)
geocoding (e.g.,
country, region,
postal code,
CBSA)
Automated
geocoding
support
1 - 100
Street-level
geocoding
support
101 - 1000
Customer
extensions to
map data (e.g.,
custom POIs)
1001 - 5000
Offline
geocoding
support
More than 5000
Figure 21 – Prioritized geocoding features by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 33
Worldwide
geocoding
support
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Viewed by industry, Financial services respondents report the greatest interest in builtin, automated, street-level, and offline geocoding feature support (fig. 22).
Transportation respondents are most interested in built-in geocoding, customer
extensions and worldwide support. Telecommunication respondents report aboveaverage interest in worldwide support. Retail and Manufacturing respondents’ interest is
highest in built-in and automated geocoding support.
Prioritized Geocoding Features by Industry
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Built-in (native)
geocoding (e.g.,
country, region,
postal code,
CBSA)
Automated
geocoding
support
Street-level
geocoding
support
Financial services
Healthcare
Manufacturing
Customer
extensions to
map data (e.g.,
custom POIs)
Telecommunications
Education
Offline
geocoding
support
Worldwide
geocoding
support
Transportation
Retail and wholesale
Figure 22 – Prioritized geocoding features by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 34
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Location Intelligence Users
Managers are the most targeted users of location intelligence in 2017, which in part
speaks to the operational nature of the technology (fig. 23). Middle managers are
frequent or occasional targets more than 80 percent of the time. Individual contributors
and line managers are frequent or occasional users between 70 and 80 percent of the
time. This targeting comes at the expense of executives, traditionally a first-served
audience (and the most-served group in our earlier studies), which may indicate
increasing/maturing penetration of location intelligence. Customers and suppliers are
relatively low priorities.
Location Intelligence Users
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Frequently
50%
Occasionally
40%
Rarely
30%
Not at all
20%
10%
0%
Middle
managers
Individual
contributors
and
professionals
Line
managers
Executives
Customers
Suppliers
Figure 23 – Location intelligence users
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 35
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Targets by geography vary somewhat in 2017, reflective of regional customs and
business structure (fig. 24). Middle managers are slightly more targeted in all
geographies, followed by line managers or individual contributors. Asia-Pacific
respondents are most enthusiastic across functions and are most likely by far to target
customers and suppliers.
Location Intelligence Users by Geography
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
North America
Asia Pacific
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Middle managers
Line managers
Individual contributors and professionals
Executives
Customers
Suppliers
Figure 24 – Location intelligence users by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 36
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across enterprises of different sizes, middle managers are usually the most likely
targets for location intelligence (fig. 25). The exception is very large (>5,000 employees)
organizations, where line managers and individual contributors are the most likely
targets. Small (1-100 employees) organizations with thinner management ranks are
most likely to target executives. Large organizations with 1.001-5000 employees are the
next most likely to target executives. Small organizations are most likely to target
customers and suppliers.
Location Intelligence Users by Organization Size
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
1 - 100
101 - 1000
1001 - 5000
Middle managers
Line managers
Individual contributors and professionals
Executives
Customers
Suppliers
Figure 25 – Location intelligence users by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 37
More than 5000
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
The primary targets for location intelligence skew noticeably by vertical industry (fig. 26).
Telecommunications and energy focus most strongly on individual contributors followed
by line managers. Retail/wholesale is more likely to target line managers, while
Financial services respondents are most likely to target middle managers. Healthcare,
which in our previous studies focused strongly on senior management, now is more
likely to target middle managers. Higher education's focus is on executives. Business
services expectedly leans toward individual contributors. Automotive and Transportation
respondents most often target line managers.
Location Intelligence Users by Industry
Telecommunications
4
Manufacturing
3.5
Energy
3
2.5
Transportation
Education
2
1.5
1
Business services
Retail and wholesale
Automotive
Financial services
Healthcare
State and local
government
Executives
Middle managers
Line managers
Individual contributors and professionals
Customers
Suppliers
Figure 26 – Location intelligence users by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 38
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Location Intelligence Features
As we found in earlier studies, the most important location intelligence features
identified by respondents in 2017 are also the most conventional: map-based
visualization of information, drill-down navigation that includes zoom and pan, and maps
that are embedded in dashboards or other displays (fig. 27). These top three categories
are at least “somewhat important” to well more than 90 percent of respondents. Layered
visualizations and value/range shading are the two next most important features and
are considered “critical” or “very important” by close to 70 percent or more of
respondents. Integration with third-party GIS systems (e.g., Google, Esri) gained
momentum compared to earlier studies and is "critical" or "very important" to nearly 70
percent of respondents.
Location Intelligence Prioritized Features
Map-based visualization of data/information
Drill-down navigation through map interface
Dashboard inclusion of maps
Layering of visualizations on top of maps (e.g., heat…
Value/range-based shading of maps
Integration with third-party GIS systems (e.g., ESRI,…
Custom region definition and selection (e.g.,…
Choropleths (area fill) maps
Use of symbols to depict values
Support for location calculations (e.g., drive time,…
Animation of data on maps
Syndicated demographic/psychographic data…
Off-line mapping
Support for interior spaces (e.g., retail stores, office…
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Not important
Somewhat important
Very important
Figure 27 – Location intelligence prioritized features
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 39
Critical
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Interest in location intelligence features reversed a 2016 downturn with sharp increases
across all measures in 2017 (fig. 28). Map-based visualization remains the most
important feature with a value of 3.4, greater than "important." Drill-down navigation,
dashboard inclusion, layering of visualizations, and value/range-based shading all
reached levels of "important" or greater. Integration with third-party GIS moved ahead of
use of symbols to depict values; choropleths also rose in ranking.
Location Intelligence Features 2014 to 2017
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
2014
2015
2016
2017
Figure 28 – Location intelligence features 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 40
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
By function, Marketing and Sales has the most bullish interest in map-based
visualization (fig. 29) and also leads interest in choropleths (area-fill maps) and support
for location calculations. The BICC is the most likely resource for the next four top
features: drill down, dashboards, layered visualizations, and value/range shading. R&D
places a higher priority upon integration with third-party GIS systems. IT is most
interested in custom region definitions.
Location Intelligence Prioritized Features
by Function
Map-based visualization of
data/information
Support for interior spaces
4
Drill-down navigation through
(e.g., retail stores, office
map interface
buildings, conference centers)
3.5
Off-line mapping
3
Dashboard inclusion of maps
2.5
Syndicated
demographic/psychographic
data integration (e.g.,…
2
1.5
Layering of visualizations on
top of maps (e.g., heat maps,
cartograms)
1
Animation of data on maps
Value/range-based shading of
maps
Support for location
calculations (e.g., drive time,
distance, routing)
Integration with third-party GIS
systems (e.g., ESRI, Google
Maps)
Custom region definition and
Use of symbols to depict values
selection (e.g., polygons,
geofencing)
Choropleths (area fill) maps
Executive Management
Information Technology (IT)
Business Intelligence Competency Center
Marketing and Sales
Finance
Research and Development (R&D)
Figure 29 – Location intelligence prioritized features by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 41
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Respondents in Asia Pacific lead interest in all location intelligence features, especially
in custom region definitions, area fill maps, and animation of data on maps (fig. 30).
Favorability for map-based visualization and drill-down navigation are the most tightly
clustered across geographies. EMEA respondents trail North American respondents in
all areas with the exception of integration with third-party GIS systems.
Location Intelligence Prioritized Features
by Geography
Map-based visualization of
data/information
4
Support for interior spaces
Drill-down navigation
(e.g., retail stores, office…
through map interface
3.5
Dashboard inclusion of
3
Off-line mapping
maps
2.5
2
Syndicated
demographic/psychograp…
Layering of visualizations
on top of maps (e.g.,…
1.5
1
Value/range-based shading
of maps
Animation of data on maps
Support for location
calculations (e.g., drive…
Integration with thirdparty GIS systems (e.g.,…
Use of symbols to depict
values
Custom region definition
and selection (e.g.,…
Choropleths (area fill)
maps
North America
Asia Pacific
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Figure 30 – Location intelligence prioritized features by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 42
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Organizations of different sizes have varying interest in location intelligence features,
though many results are tightly clustered (fig. 31). Map-based visualizations have
common appeal across different-sized organizations. Where larger organizations are
slightly more interested in drill-down navigation, small organizations (1-100 employees)
have the highest interest in dashboards. Mid-sized (101-1,000 employees)
organizations lead interest in layering of visualizations and value/range-based shading.
Very large (>5,000 employees) organizations are most concerned with third-party GIS
systems and custom region definition.
Location Intelligence Prioritized Features
by Organization Size
Map-based visualization of
data/information
Support for interior spaces
(e.g., retail stores, office…
4
Drill-down navigation through
map interface
3.5
3
Off-line mapping
Dashboard inclusion of maps
2.5
2
Syndicated
demographic/psychographic…
Layering of visualizations on
top of maps (e.g., heat…
1.5
1
Value/range-based shading of
maps
Animation of data on maps
Support for location
calculations (e.g., drive time,…
Integration with third-party
GIS systems (e.g., ESRI,…
Use of symbols to depict
Custom region definition and
values
selection (e.g., polygons,…
Choropleths (area fill) maps
1 - 100
101 - 1000
1001 - 5000
More than 5000
Figure 31 – Location intelligence prioritized features by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 43
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
In our 2017 sample, the energy sector is a standout among industries with interest in
location intelligence features (fig. 32). This includes top features of map-based
visualization and drill-down navigation but is most pronounced in layering of
visualizations, value/range-based shading, integration with third-party GIS, custom
region definition and support for location calculations. Telecommunications reports the
most interest in dashboard inclusion of maps. Healthcare has slightly more interest in
choropleths (area fill maps), perhaps in pursuit of asset management or population
health studies.
Location Intelligence Prioritized Features
by Industry
Map-based visualization of
data/information
Support for interior spaces
(e.g., retail stores, office…
Off-line mapping
4
Drill-down navigation through
map interface
3.5
3
Dashboard inclusion of maps
2.5
Syndicated
demographic/psychographic…
2
Layering of visualizations on
top of maps (e.g., heat…
1.5
1
Value/range-based shading of
maps
Animation of data on maps
Support for location
calculations (e.g., drive time,…
Integration with third-party
GIS systems (e.g., ESRI,…
Use of symbols to depict
Custom region definition and
values
selection (e.g., polygons,…
Choropleths (area fill) maps
Energy
Telecommunications
Healthcare
Financial services
Figure 32 – Location intelligence prioritized features by vertical industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 44
Education
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Location Intelligence User Penetration
Location intelligence penetration remains modest in 2017, though respondents describe
significant growth plans (fig. 33). Today, 59 percent of respondents report less than 10
percent penetration and only 6 percent report the highest level of penetration. Twelvemonth plans (the most dependable and likely to be budgeted) call for reducing the
lowest penetration to about 30 percent and more than doubling 11 to 20 percent and 41
to 60 percent penetration levels. Forecasts for 24 and 36 months call for extended
growth of higher levels of penetration.
Location Intelligence User Penetration
2017 to 2020
100%
90%
80%
70%
81% or more
60%
61 - 80%
21 - 40%
50%
41 - 60%
40%
11 - 20%
Under 10%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Today
In 12 months
In 24 months
In 36 months
Figure 33 – Location intelligence user penetration 2017 to 2020
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 45
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across four years of data, we have seen steady if somewhat modest improvements in
location intelligence penetration (fig. 34). Since 2014, the lowest level (<10 percent)
decreased annually from 74 percent to 59 percent while 11 to 20 percent penetration
increased from 9 percent to 16 percent. Higher levels of penetration have not fared as
well over time. 2017 respondents reported a modest spike at the 21 to 40 percent level
and a modest increase at 81 percent or more but saw modest declines at other high
levels of penetration.
Location Intelligence Penetration 2014 to 2017
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Under 10%
11 - 20%
41 - 60%
2014
2015
21 - 40%
2016
61 - 80%
2017
Figure 34 – Location intelligence penetration 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 46
81% or more
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
User penetration is expected to improve across all functions in the coming time frames
(fig. 35). The greatest 12-month improvements will occur in Executive Management,
indicating leadership is on board and willing to drive future penetration of location
intelligence. While Marketing and Sales are among early adopters (after executives)
longer-term plans are somewhat muted. R&D, BICC, and IT functions appear to be
getting on board with location intelligence. This is in contrast to the Finance function
with very limited adoption or future plans.
Location Intelligence User Penetration
2017 to 2020 by Function
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
81% or more
40%
61 - 80%
30%
21 - 40%
20%
41 - 60%
10%
11 - 20%
Executive Marketing and Information
Management
Sales
Technology (IT)
Finance
Business
Intelligence
Competency
Center
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
Today
In 12 months
In 36 months
In 24 months
Today
In 12 months
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
Today
In 12 months
0%
Research and
Development
(R&D)
Figure 35 – Location intelligence user penetration 2017 to 2020 by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 47
Under 10%
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
By geography, Asia-Pacific respondents report the greatest current penetration of
location intelligence products and services (fig. 36). This finding comes despite the fact
that North American respondents generally prioritize location intelligence to a greater
degree than in Asia Pacific (fig. 9, p. 21). Asia-Pacific respondents also will see the
highest levels of future penetration, with 50 percent of organizations reaching the two
highest penetration levels in three years. EMEA uniformly trails North America in current
and future penetration levels, perhaps due in part to the different border and regulation
challenges across geographies.
Location Intelligence User Penetration 2017 to
2020 by Geography
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Today
In 12 In 24 In 36 Today In 12 In 24 In 36 Today In 12 In 24 In 36
months months months
months months months
months months months
North America
Under 10%
11 - 20%
Asia/Pacific
41 - 60%
21 - 40%
Europe, Middle East and Africa
61 - 80%
Figure 36 – Location intelligence user penetration 2017 to 2020 by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 48
81% or more
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Organizations of different sizes all expect location intelligence penetration levels to
increase consecutively in coming time frames (fig. 37). Small (1-100 employees)
organizations claim the highest current levels of penetration, a likely finding among low
headcount groups. Small organizations also have consistently higher penetration
expectations than mid-sized and large/very large organizations. Mid-sized (101-1,000
employees) organizations are the next most penetrated and also have strong future
plans to increase their base of location intelligence users. Very large (>1,000
employees) organizations are the least penetrated today (by percentage of employees),
an expected finding that we expect will decrease sharply in 12-month and extended
future time frames.
Location Intelligence User Penetration
2017 to 2020 by Organization Size
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
1 - 100
Under 10%
101 - 1000
11 - 20%
41 - 60%
1001 - 5000
21 - 40%
61 - 80%
Figure 37 – Location intelligence user penetration 2017 to 2020 by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 49
More than 5000
81% or more
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
0%
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
By industry, respondents in Transportation report the highest current uptake of location
intelligence (fig. 38). Retail/wholesale is the next most penetrated and has the most
aggressive plans for dramatic levels of penetration within three years. Energy, which
leads our survey in perceived criticality (fig. 11, p. 23) is more sanguine about future
prospects, perhaps indicating that current use cases in core operational processes are
being addressed. Telecommunications respondents expect little 12-month improvement
but predict higher penetration in longer time frames.
Location Intelligence User Penetration
2017 to 2020 by Industry
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
Retail and wholesale
Telecommunications
Under 10%
11 - 20%
Energy
41 - 60%
Financial services
21 - 40%
Transportation
61 - 80%
Figure 38 – Location intelligence user penetration 2017 to 2020 by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 50
Education
81% or more
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
Today
In 36 months
In 24 months
In 12 months
0%
Today
10%
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Cloud-Based Versus On-Premises Deployment of Location Intelligence
In our 2017 study, we asked respondents to describe the criticality of cloud-based
versus on-premises adoption of location intelligence (fig. 39). By margins of a few
percentage points, respondents are more likely to prefer on-premises deployment but
clearly are not daunted by the prospects for cloud-based deployment. Over time, we
expect prospects for both deployment models to remain intact and for cloud-based
favorability to increase.
Cloud-Based Versus On-Premises Location
Intelligence
Cloud-based (SaaS)
On premises
0%
Critical
10%
20%
30%
Very important
40%
50%
60%
Somewhat important
70%
80%
Not important
Figure 39 – Cloud-based versus on-premises location intelligence
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 51
90%
100%
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Interest in cloud versus on-premises location intelligence varies interestingly by
geography (fig. 40). As we might expect, Asia-Pacific respondents are more likely to
prefer cloud-based (SaaS) deployment. EMEA respondents are almost evenly divided in
their attitudes toward both deployment models. North American respondents are more
likely to prefer on-premises deployments, which may refer in part to existing legacy
investments that are initially more likely to be in house.
Cloud-Based Versus On-Premises Location
Intelligence by Geography
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
North America
Asia Pacific
On premises
Europe, Middle East and
Africa
Cloud-based (SaaS)
Figure 40 – Cloud-based versus on-premises location intelligence by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 52
Latin America
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
By function, executive management is most interested in cloud-based deployments of
location intelligence and gives cloud its highest criticality ranking of 3.0, or "important"
(fig. 41). Perhaps by executive fiat, R&D is also currently aligning more toward cloudbased deployment. All other functions currently report a preference for on-premises
deployment, perhaps in service of familiarity and existing investments.
Cloud-Based Versus On-Premises Location
Intelligence by Function
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Executive
Management
Marketing and
Sales
Information
Technology (IT)
On premises
Finance
Business
Intelligence
Competency
Center
Cloud-based (SaaS)
Figure 41 – Cloud-based versus on-premises location intelligence by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 53
Research and
Development
(R&D)
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
By industry, we would expect the most penetrated verticals to favor existing deployment
models, which in first-mover form are more likely to be on premises. In that regard,
respondents in State/local government, Energy, Education, Healthcare, Automotive and
Transportation industries all have the highest bias toward on-premises deployment (fig.
42). Business services is especially more likely to offer or use cloud-based location
intelligence as are telecommunication respondents. Even the highly regulated Financial
services industry reports slightly greater favorability toward cloud/SaaS deployment.
Cloud-Based Versus On-Premises Location
Intelligence by Industry
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
On premises
Cloud-based (SaaS)
Figure 42 – Cloud-based versus on-premises location intelligence by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 54
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Favorability toward on-premises versus cloud-based use of location intelligence varies
strongly, predictably, and even linearly by organization size (fig. 43). Small
organizations, with expense and infrastructure in mind, are much more likely (criticality>
3.0 = "important") to choose cloud-based location intelligence. As organization size
increases, so typically does experience and infrastructure in place to support onpremises deployments of location intelligence products and services.
Cloud-Based Versus On-Premises Location
Intelligence by Organization Size
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
On premises
1 - 100
Cloud-based (SaaS)
101 - 1000
1001 - 5000
More than 5000
Figure 43 – Cloud-based versus on-premises location intelligence by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 55
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
User Devices Where Location Intelligence Will Be Utilized
Each year, we examine how users access location intelligence technologies and
services via fixed and/or mobile platforms and devices (fig. 44). In 2017 (as in our
earlier studies), desktops and laptops are the most popular (more than 80 percent
"critical" or "very important") and well ahead of mobile devices. In part, we expect the
drivers of this finding are "real estate" issues, multitasking, and current use cases for
location intelligence. Still, more than half of respondent organizations expect location
intelligence access across desktops, mobile phones, and tablets. As other dimensions
of use reveal, roles, industry, and geography help explain this distribution of users.
Location Intelligence User Devices
100%
5
90%
4.5
80%
4
70%
3.5
60%
Critical
Very important
50%
3
Important
Somewhat important
40%
2.5
30%
Not important
Mean
2
20%
1.5
10%
0%
1
Desktop or
Mobile phone Tablet computer
laptop computer
Smartwatch
Figure 44 – Location intelligence user devices
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 56
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Though business functions agree that mobile use of location intelligence technology will
be in the mix, all roles are by far more likely to access location technology on a desktop
or laptop (fig. 45). This is especially the case in Marketing and Sales, where we would
expect functions to be "in the field" more often. Generally, we can infer that analyzing
location intelligence most likely occurs in the office and at the management level versus
in the field at the operational level. It is also noteworthy that mobile phone-based
location intelligence, though well below desktop use, ranks ahead of tablet use for all
functions except Finance, where tablet and phone use are equal.
Location Intelligence User Devices by Function
Executive Management
Business Intelligence
Competency Center
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Business Intelligence
Competency Center
Marketing and Sales
Information Technology
(IT)
Finance
Desktop or laptop computer
Mobile phone
Tablet computer
Figure 45 – Location intelligence user devices by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 57
Smartwatch
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
A mixed-use model of mobile and fixed technologies holds across regions in 2017,
though desktop/laptop preference has the clear edge across all geographies (fig. 46).
Asia-Pacific respondents report the highest likelihood of using all devices, particularly
tablets and mobile phones, and deliver the only relevant level of smartwatch interest in
our report. After Asia Pacific, North American respondents report the next highest
interest in multiple advices and rank ahead of EMEA counterparts in all devices polled.
Location Intelligence User Devices
by Geography
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Desktop or laptop
computer
North America
Mobile phone
Asia Pacific
Tablet computer
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Figure 46 – Location intelligence user devices by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 58
Smartwatch
Mean
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Organizations of different sizes all choose desktops/laptops well over all other devices
(with mean scores of 4.2 to 4.4 or "very important") (fig. 47). Small (1-100 employees)
organizations make mobile phones their second choice, while the second choice at very
large (>5,000 employees) organizations is tablets. Smartwatch use is less than
"somewhat important" at organizations of all sizes.
Location Intelligence User Devices by
Organization Size
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
1 - 100
101 - 1000
Desktop or laptop computer
Mobile phone
1001 - 5000
Tablet computer
Figure 47 – Location intelligence user devices by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 59
More than 5000
Smartwatch
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across vertical industries, desktop/laptop use is the preferred choice at all industries
sampled in 2017 (fig. 48). The gap between desktop/laptop and other devices is
smallest in business services, where mobile phone use is considered "very important"
and tablet use is well above "important." The highest score for desktop/laptop comes in
energy, where overall value is near "critical." Overall device use again indicates users
that are at headquarters rather than in the field and more likely managers versus
operational users.
Location Intelligence User Devices by Industry
Business services
5
Other
4.5
Education
4
3.5
State and local
government
Healthcare
3
2.5
2
1.5
Retail and wholesale
Financial services
1
Transportation
Energy
Manufacturing
Automotive
Telecommunications
Desktop or laptop computer
Mobile phone
Tablet computer
Figure 48 – Location intelligence user devices by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 60
Smartwatch
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Mobile Location Intelligence Features
For a fourth year, we measured the perceived criticality of three mobile location
intelligence feature priorities: location-based query filtering, reverse geocoding, and geo
fence alerting. In 2017, respondents strongly choose mobile location-based query
filtering (the software’s ability to query data using current location as a filter parameter)
as their highest priority (fig. 49). This feature is "critical" to 36 percent of respondents
and very important to another 42 percent. Less than 10 percent say location-based
query filtering is "not important." While less critical, the other two features sampled—
reverse geocoding (creating a physical address or place name from coordinate
information) and geo fence alerting (alerting when a device crosses a defined boundary)
—are, at minimum, "somewhat important" to 85 and 78 percent of respondents
respectively.
Mobile Location Intelligence Features
100%
4
90%
3.5
80%
70%
3
60%
Not important
50%
2.5
Somewhat important
Very important
40%
Critical
2
30%
20%
1.5
10%
0%
1
Location-based query
filtering
Reverse geocoding
Geo fence alerting
Figure 49 – Mobile location intelligence features
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 61
Mean
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Location-based query filtering is again the most popular mobile location intelligence
feature across all functions studied in 2017 (fig. 50). Reverse geocoding is almost
uniformly the second most popular feature across all functions, with the exception of
Marketing and Sales. Because of a field orientation, Sales, in particular, finds utility in
geo fence alerting.
Mobile Location Intelligence Features
by Function
Executive Management
4
3.5
Research and
Development (R&D)
3
Marketing and Sales
2.5
2
1.5
1
Business Intelligence
Competency Center
Information Technology
(IT)
Finance
Location-based query filtering
Reverse geocoding
Geo fence alerting
Figure 50 – Mobile location intelligence features by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 62
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
The emphasis on location-based query filtering extends to all geographic regions in
2017 (fig. 50). In addition, all geographies, led by Asia Pacific, prioritize reverse
geocoding and geofence alerting second and third respectively.
Mobile Location Intelligence Features
by Geography
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
North America
Location-based query filtering
Asia Pacific
Reverse geocoding
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Geo fence alerting
Figure 51 – Mobile location intelligence features by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 63
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
As we find in other measures, location-based query filtering is the strongest priority for
organizations of any size (fig. 52). 2017 sentiment for location-based filtering is slightly
higher in mid-sized (101-1,000 employees) and small (1-100 employees) organizations
than among larger peers. Where we might expect more interest at large and very large
organizations, mid-sized organizations also report the highest levels of interest in
reverse geocoding and geofence alerting.
Mobile Location Intelligence Features
by Organization Size
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
1 - 100
101 - 1000
Location-based query filtering
1001 - 5000
Reverse geocoding
More than 5000
Geo fence alerting
Figure 52 – Mobile location intelligence features by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 64
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Location-based query filtering is the most prioritized mobile location intelligence feature
across all vertical industries highlighted in 2017 (fig. 51). Feature preferences among
Transportation respondents are most tightly clustered to include reverse geocoding and
geofence alerting. The largest gaps between location-based query filtering and other
mobile location features are found in Manufacturing, Healthcare, Business services, and
Telecommunications.
Mobile Location Intelligence Features
by Industry
State and local
government
Telecommunications
4
3.5
Transportation
3
2.5
Automotive
Energy
2
1.5
1
Retail and wholesale
Education
Financial services
Manufacturing
Location-based query filtering
Business services
Healthcare
Reverse geocoding
Figure 53 – Mobile location intelligence features by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 65
Geo fence alerting
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Required Integration with GIS Vendors
We asked respondents to prioritize integration requirements with geographic information
system vendors (fig. 54). As in previous years, the favorite integration target is Google,
which is a requirement in more than 70 percent of organizations. Esri follows distantly
with 39 percent, and database extensions (37 percent) are the remaining notable
location intelligence integration requirements.
Location Intelligence Integration with GIS
Technologies
Google
Esri
Database extensions (e.g., Oracle, Postgres)
Microsoft (Bing)
WMS (Web Map Service)
MapInfo
TomTom
NAVTEQ
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Figure 54 – Location intelligence integration with GIS technologies
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 66
70%
80%
90%
100%
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across four years of data, we see some notable trending in location intelligence
integration with GIS technologies requirements (fig. 55). Most notably, sentiment toward
Google integration declined 14 percent compared to 2014, interest in Esri grew 9
percent year over year, and database extensions interest grew by a similar amount. All
remaining GIS technologies are down or grew minimally for 2017.
Location Intelligence Integration with GIS
Technologies 2014 to 2017
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Google
Esri
Database Microsoft
extensions
(Bing)
(e.g., Oracle,
Postgres)
2014
2015
MapInfo
2016
WMS (Web
Map
Service)
2017
Figure 55 – Location intelligence integration with GIS technologies 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 67
TomTom
NAVTEQ
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
By function, Executive Management and the BICC lead demand for Google GIS
integration in 2017 (fig. 56). Marketing/Sales and Finance are most likely to require
integration with Esri. In a likely leading indicator of demand, R&D and the BICC lead
interest in database extensions. The remaining choices, (Bing, WMS, MapInfo, etc.) all
have minimal appeal for GIS integration.
Location Intelligence Integration with GIS
Technologies by Function
Google
100%
NAVTEQ
80%
Esri
60%
40%
20%
TomTom
Database extensions (e.g.,
Oracle, Postgres)
0%
MapInfo
Microsoft (Bing)
WMS (Web Map Service)
Information Technology (IT)
Business Intelligence Competency Center
Executive Management
Research and Development (R&D)
Marketing and Sales
Finance
Figure 56 – Location intelligence integration with GIS technologies by function
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 68
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Google integration demand is highest across all geographies with Asia Pacific ranking
the highest (fig. 57). By comparison, requirements for Esri and database extension
integration are highest by far in North America, second highest in EMEA and least
popular in Asia Pacific. All other GIS technology requirements have declined over time.
Location Intelligence Integration with GIS
Technologies by Geography
Google
100%
NAVTEQ
80%
Esri
60%
40%
20%
TomTom
Database extensions
(e.g., Oracle, Postgres)
0%
MapInfo
Microsoft (Bing)
WMS (Web Map Service)
North America
Asia Pacific
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Figure 57 – Location intelligence integration with GIS technologies by geography
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 69
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Organizations of all sizes still most prefer Google GIS integration, a requirement that
tends to decrease as organization size increases (fig. 58). Conversely, the requirement
for Esri integration increases as organization headcount increases. Requirements are
less related to size for database extensions where small (1-100 employees) and some
large (1,001-5,000 employees) organizations are most interested.
Location Intelligence Integration with GIS
Technologies by Organization Size
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Google
Esri
Database Microsoft WMS (Web
extensions
(Bing)
Map
(e.g., Oracle,
Service)
Postgres)
1 - 100
101 - 1000
1001 - 5000
MapInfo
TomTom
More than 5000
Figure 58 – Location intelligence integration with GIS technologies by organization size
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 70
NAVTEQ
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Location intelligence integration with GIS technologies varies considerably across
vertical industries (fig. 59). Among notable findings, Esri integration is universal among
State/local government respondents, is by far the top choice in Healthcare, and is tied
(with Google) as the top choice in Energy. Google is by far the top choice among all
other industries except Education, where database extensions are most popular and
likely tied to both proprietary and public data.
Location Intelligence Integration with GIS
Technologies by Industry
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Google
Database extensions (e.g., Oracle, Postgres)
WMS (Web Map Service)
TomTom
Esri
Microsoft (Bing)
MapInfo
NAVTEQ
Figure 59 – Location intelligence integration with GIS technologies by industry
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 71
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Industry Support for Location Intelligence
Across four years of data, industry support for location intelligence has clearly increased
(fig. 60). If not hype-laden enthusiasm, the software industry nonetheless ascribes a
"very important" view to the technology in 2017. While "critically important" estimations
have declined since 2015, "not important" appraisals have disappeared entirely across
our base of providers. While vendors tend to lead enthusiasm, this finding implies that
location intelligence is "crossing the chasm" and destined to become mainstream.
Industry Importance of Location Intelligence
2014 to 2017
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Not important
Important
50%
Very important
40%
Critically important
30%
20%
10%
0%
2014
2015
2016
2017
Figure 60 – Industry importance of location intelligence 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 72
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Industry Support for Geocoding
As depicted in fig. 61, industry support for geocoding features is limited today and
somewhat poorly aligned with user preferences (see fig. 17, p. 29). The top industrysupported feature, built-in geocoding, is also the top customer preference. However,
automated and street-level geocoding support (second and third in customer
preference) rank third and sixth respectively, in industry support. Worldwide support,
least important to the respondent base, is the second most supported feature by
industry vendors in 2017.
Industry Support for Geocoding
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
No Plans
40%
24 months
30%
12 months
20%
Today: Third-party library
10%
Today: Core functionality
0%
Built-in Worldwide Automated Customer
Offline Street-level
geocoding geocoding geocoding extensions geocoding geocoding
(e.g.,
support
support
to map
support
support
country,
data (e.g.,
region,
custom
postal
POIs)
clode,
CBSA)
Figure 61 – Industry support for geocoding
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 73
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across four years of data, industry support for built-in geocoding increased, but
decreased across most other parameters (fig. 62). One significant finding not
sufficiently reflected in this chart is that many of the features noted in decline
have shifted to third-party integration versus core integration. While built-in
geocoding and automated geocoding remain core functions, other requirements
(worldwide geocoding, customer extensions, etc.) are shifting to third-party libraries or
other facilities.
Industry Support for Geocoding: Core Integration
2014 to 2017
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
2014
2015
30%
2016
20%
2017
10%
0%
Built-in
geocoding
(e.g., country,
region, postal
code, CBSA)
Worldwide
geocoding
support
Automated
Customer
geocoding
extensions to
support
map data (e.g.,
custom POIs)
Offline
geocoding
support
Figure 62 – Industry support for geocoding: core integration 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 74
Street-level
geocoding
support
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Industry Support for Location Intelligence Features
As a group, business intelligence vendors are attending to a full span of location
intelligence features (fig. 63). The top five categories of industry priorities—dashboards,
map-based visualization, choropleths, drill-down navigation, and value/range shading—
are supported by 76 to 80 percent of vendors. Industry support for features is somewhat
aligned with user expectations, though in different order (see fig. 27. p. 39). Users rank
map-based visualization as most critical, followed by drill-down navigation, dashboards,
and layering of visualizations. Choropleths, which leapfrogged to sixth in user criticality,
are among the features highly supported by vendors.
Industry Support for Location Intelligence
Features
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Today: Core functionality
Today: Third-party library
12 months
24 months
Figure 63 – Industry support for location intelligence features
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 75
No plans
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across four years of data, industry support for most top location intelligence features
decreased year over year (fig. 64). An exception in user sentiment noted elsewhere
(see fig. 28, p. 40) was choropleths, where industry support grew year over year. We
also see increases in other lesser feature integration priorities including custom regions,
integration with third-party GIS, and support for interior spaces. Again we ascribe some
of the declines noted here to third-party technology adoption as opposed to core
integration shortfalls.
Industry Support for Location Intelligence
Features : Core Integration 2014 to 2017
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2014
2015
2016
2017
Figure 64 – Industry support for location intelligence features: core integration 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 76
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Industry Support for Third-Party GIS Platforms
Industry support for integration to third-party GIS platforms trended along the lines of
user preferences across four years of data (fig. 63). Most notably, support for Google
declined from 82 percent to 64 percent. In the same time span, Esri support rose from
52 percent and now stands at 64 percent. Support for database extensions grew,
putting the top three industry priorities in line with user expectations (see fig. 55, p. 57).
Declining support for other third-party platforms is also in line with user behavior.
Industry Support for Third-Party GIS Platforms
2014 to 2017
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Esri
Google
Database Microsoft WMS (Web TomTom
extensions
(Bing) Map Service)
(e.g., Oracle,
Postgres)
2014
2015
2016
2017
Figure 65 – Industry support for third-party GIS platforms 2014 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 77
MapInfo
NAVTEQ
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Industry Support for Mobile Location Intelligence Features
Industry support for mobile location intelligence features is aligned with user priorities
(see fig. 49, p. 61), though support remains somewhat immature (fig. 66). Half the
vendors we surveyed currently offer location-based query filtering, and less than 30
percent support reverse geocoding and/or geo fence alerting. Twelve-month plans to
expand support for geo fence alerting are especially thin.
Industry Support for Mobile Location Intelliegnce
Features
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
No plans
50%
24 months
40%
12 months
Today
30%
20%
10%
0%
Location-based query
filtering
Reverse Geocoding
Geo fence alerting
Figure 66 – Industry support for mobile location intelligence features
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 78
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Across four years of data, industry support for mobile location intelligence features
increased across all parameters in 2017 (fig. 67). Location-based query filtering
remained the top choice by far, though relative increases were stronger in reverse
geocoding and geo fence alerting. These findings are again in line with user sentiment.
Industry Support for Mobile Location Intelligence
Features 2014 to 2017
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Location-based query filtering
Reverse geocoding
2014
2015
2016
Geo fence alerting
2017
Figure 67 – Industry support for mobile location intelligence features 2014 to 2016
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 79
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Demand versus Supply Priorities for Location Intelligence
Despite the aforementioned gaps in industry prioritization and support, the industry is
only somewhat in sync with user estimations of location intelligence criticality (fig. 68).
Where user estimations of the "critical" value of location intelligence grew, it declined
among vendors. That said, on a weighted mean basis, industry importance slightly
exceeds user importance.
User Versus Industry Importance of Location
Intelligence 2016 to 2017
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2016
2017
2016
Industry
Critically important
2017
Users
Very important
Somewhat important
Figure 68 – User versus industry importance of location intelligence 2016 to 2017
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 80
Not imporant
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Location Intelligence Vendor Ratings
This year we include 15 business intelligence vendors in our Location Intelligence
ratings (fig. 69). For each vendor we considered geocoding support, integration, and
location features. Only vendors that scored 50 percent or greater are included in this
report.
Top vendors include Qlik (1st), Alteryx (2nd), Logi Analytics (2nd), TIBCO (3rd), Domo
(4th), and Tableau (5th).
Location Intelligence Vendor Ratings
Qlik
SAP
32
Alteryx
16
Pentaho
Logi Analytics
8
4
Dundas
TIBCO
2
1
Birst
Domo
Looker
Tableau
Information Builders
MicroStrategy
Geocoding + Integration Score
Sisense
Pyramid Analytics
Features Score
Total Score
Figure 69 – Location Intelligence vendor ratings
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 81
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Other Dresner Advisory Services Research Reports
-
Wisdom of Crowds “Flagship” Business Intelligence Market study
Advanced and Predictive Analytics
Big Data Analytics
Business Intelligence Competency Center
Cloud Computing and Business Intelligence
Collective Insights®
End User Data Preparation
Enterprise Planning
Internet of Things and Business Intelligence
Natural Language Analytics
Small and Mid-Sized Enterprise Business Intelligence
Systems Integrators
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 82
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Appendix: Location Intelligence Survey Instrument
Name*: _________________________________________________
Company Name: _________________________________________________
Address 1: _________________________________________________
Address 2: _________________________________________________
City: _________________________________________________
State: _________________________________________________
Zip: _________________________________________________
Country: _________________________________________________
Email Address*: _________________________________________________
Phone Number: _________________________________________________
Major Geography:
( ) Asia/Pacific
( ) Europe, Middle East and Africa
( ) Latin America
( ) North America
What is your current title?
_________________________________________________
What function are you a part of?
( ) Business intelligence competency center
( ) Executive management
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 83
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
( ) Finance
( ) Information Technology (IT)
( ) Manufacturing
( ) Marketing
( ) Project/program management office
( ) Sales
( ) Research and development (R&D)
( ) Other - Write In: _________________________________________________
Please select an industry
( ) Advertising
( ) Aerospace
( ) Agriculture
( ) Apparel and accessories
( ) Automotive
( ) Aviation
( ) Biotechnology
( ) Broadcasting
( ) Business services
( ) Chemical
( ) Construction
( ) Consulting
( ) Consumer products
( ) Defense
( ) Distribution & logistics
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 84
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
( ) Education
( ) Energy
( ) Entertainment and leisure
( ) Executive search
( ) Federal government
( ) Financial services
( ) Food, beverage and tobacco
( ) Healthcare
( ) Hospitality
( ) Gaming
( ) Insurance
( ) Legal
( ) Manufacturing
( ) Mining
( ) Motion picture and video
( ) Not for profit
( ) Pharmaceuticals
( ) Publishing
( ) Real estate
( ) Retail and wholesale
( ) Sports
( ) State and local government
( ) Technology
( ) Telecommunications
( ) Transportation
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 85
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
( ) Utilities
( ) Other - Write In: _________________________________________________
How many employees does your company employ worldwide?
( ) 1 - 100
( ) 101 - 1000
( ) 1001 - 5000
( ) More than 5000
Does your organization currently use location intelligence products/solutions today?*
( ) Yes, today
( ) Future plans
( ) No plans
Which product(s) do you current use for location intelligence?
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
____________________________________________
How satisfied are you with your vendor and product for location intelligence?
( ) Extremely satisfied
( ) Somewhat satisfied
( ) Somewhat unsatisfied
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 86
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
( ) Unsatisfied
What is the level of importance of leveraging geographic location within your Business
Intelligence strategy?*
( ) Critically important
( ) Very important
( ) Somewhat important
( ) Not important
Which functions use or will use location intelligence?
Frequent
Occasionally
Rarely
Not at all
Sales
()
()
()
()
Marketing
()
()
()
()
Finance
()
()
()
()
Human
resources
()
()
()
()
Information
Technology
(IT)
()
()
()
()
Manufacturing
()
()
()
()
Which levels of individuals use Location Intelligence in your organization?
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 87
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Frequently
Occasionally
Rarely
Not
at
all
Executives
()
()
()
()
Middle
managers
()
()
()
()
Line
managers
()
()
()
()
Individual
contributors
and
professionals
()
()
()
()
Customers
()
()
()
()
Suppliers
()
()
()
()
What level of geographic detail is required for your organization?
Critical
Very
important
Somewhat
important
Not
important
Country
()
()
()
()
Province or state
()
()
()
()
Postal code
()
()
()
()
Latitude/Longitude
()
()
()
()
Custom
geography
()
()
()
()
Physical store,
()
()
()
()
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 88
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
plant, office or
other work facility
Virtual worlds
()
()
()
()
Which geocoding features are most important to have in your BI/Location Intelligence
product?
Geocoding is the process of finding associated geographic coordinates (often
expressed as latitude and longitude) from other geographic data, such as street
addresses, or ZIP codes (postal codes).
Critical
Very
important
Somewhat
important
Not
important
Built-in
(native)
geocoding
(e.g.,
country,
region,
postal
code,
CBSA)
()
()
()
()
Streetlevel
geocoding
support
()
()
()
()
Automated
geocoding
support
()
()
()
()
Offline
geocoding
support
()
()
()
()
Worldwide
()
()
()
()
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 89
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
geocoding
support
Customer
extensions
to map
data (e.g.,
custom
POIs)
()
()
()
()
Which Location Intelligence features are most important to you?
Critical
Very
important
Somewhat
important
Not
important
Map-based visualization of
data/information
()
()
()
()
Drill down navigation
through map interface
()
()
()
()
Layering of visualizations
on top of maps (e.g., heat
maps, cartograms)
()
()
()
()
Value/range-based shading
of maps
()
()
()
()
Use of symbols to depict
values
()
()
()
()
Dashboard inclusion of
maps
()
()
()
()
Animation of data on maps
()
()
()
()
Choropleths (area fill) maps
()
()
()
()
Custom region definition
()
()
()
()
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 90
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
and selection (e.g.,
polygons, geofencing)
Support for location
calculations (e.g., drive
time, distance, routing)
()
()
()
()
Support for interior spaces
(e.g., retail stores, office
buildings, conference
centers)
()
()
()
()
Off-line mapping
()
()
()
()
Integration with third party
GIS systems (e.g., Esri,
Google Maps)
()
()
()
()
Syndicated
demographic/psychographic
data integration (e.g.,
Experian, Axiom)
()
()
()
()
Do you require integration with third party GIS vendors? If so, which ones?
[ ] Esri
[ ] Google
[ ] Microsoft (Bing)
[ ] MapInfo
[ ] TomTom
[ ] NAVTEQ
[ ] WMS (Web Map Service)
[ ] Database extensions (e.g., Oracle, Postgres)
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 91
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
What percentage of the user population use/will use Location Intelligence applications in
your organization?
Under
10%
11 20%
21 40%
41 60%
81%
or
more
61 80%
Today
()
()
()
()
()
()
In 12
months
()
()
()
()
()
()
In 24
months
()
()
()
()
()
()
In 36
months
()
()
()
()
()
()
Please specify the importance of on-premises versus cloud deployment options for
location intelligence
Critical
Very
important
Somewhat
important
Not
important
Cloudbased
(SaaS)
()
()
()
()
On
premises
()
()
()
()
Please specify the importance of devices by which users will leverage location
intelligence content/applications
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 92
DAS Location Intelligence Market Study 2017
Very
important
Critical
Important
Somewhat
important
Not
important
Desktop or
laptop
computer
()
()
()
()
()
Mobile
phone
()
()
()
()
()
Tablet
computer
()
()
()
()
()
Smartwatch
()
()
()
()
()
Which Mobile Location Intelligence features are most important to you?
Critical
Very
important
Somewhat
important
Not
important
Reverse
geocoding
()
()
()
()
Locationbased
query
filtering
()
()
()
()
Geo fence
alerting
()
()
()
()
COPYRIGHT 2017 DRESNER ADVISORY SERVICES, LLC
Page | 93