5 out of 5.0, Reviewed Oct 18, 2016
Great vendor to work with. We are a nonprofit and they support nonprofits and have a whole division dedicated to them
Know what you are getting into, the limitations of the software
Agility and ease of use for both users and developers
right now nothing, they have met all our expectations.
understood our business
educate our integrator who was not experienced with our complexities.
We use a third party and infrequently need to go to Salesforce directly. There stuff works.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Oct 18, 2016
Excellent experience. Applications and processes seemles port over to SalesForce1 platform enabling our staff to access information while on the go.
Follow SalesForce directions and it will work for you
it works as the vendor said it would work. No custom code is needed - all functionality is out of the box enabling us to go mobile
Great support - responsvie, knowledgebale, able to answer our questions.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Oct 3, 2016
Format of the pages are well thought out and designed.
3 out of 5.0, Reviewed Sep 21, 2016
Overall the implementation of the new services went smoothly. The legal and contracting process was extremely inflexible and exhaustive. Legal representation was perhaps the toughest we have ever worked with.
Be prepared for the long and drawn out contracting process.
Flexibility to adapt to multiple different business needs.
Amount of expertise needed to do development.
Acted more collaboratively and openly while in the contracting process.
Did not purchase support
3 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 30, 2016
Offers excellent integration to existing platform
supporting instructions/artifacts could be better
ease of implementation product roadmap relationship to JPMC support
Cost and data at rest is not protected to the client's satisfaction. we are looking at alternate solutions for data protection
Better data protection on the cloud
Easy Integration. Agnostic Architecture. Excellent Roadmap and product development strategy.
Salesforce provides excellent support to their tier-1 clients.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 25, 2016
The capabilities of the platform were greater than the ability of our business team to adjust legacy SDLC to adopt the flexibility that is possible with the platform. We ended up creating a highly bespoke, customised system as though we were building from the ground up on a platform did not arrive with pre-enabled capabilities. Because of this, we took on a LOT of future maintenance and support because everything that was added in the future involved changes to the customised system. Best practice to keep the code customizations to a minimum and lean as much as possible on the capabilities that the platform comes with, even to the point of a modifying business process where possible, to avoid future difficulty in maintaining the system.
Utilise configuration of the platform and not code customization. Tweak business process where possible to allow utilisation of out-of-box platform capabilities.
Flexibility and capability of the broader platform offerings.
As everyone knows, it is relatively expensive. If you customise the capabilities at all, you can get yourself into a situation where you pick up maintenance costs and lose some of the inherent benefits of the platform.
Provided stronger best practice guidance from the start, so we didn't end up going so far down the full code customization path.
Not customise the Force.com platform as much as we did.
5 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 16, 2016
Very Simple straight forward implementation process.
Don't 100% rely on 3rd party.
Get upfront training.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 2, 2016
Keep evaluate the release notes, many features added over times.
On the cloud and great performance.
Features to add.
Make the product more available.
Get / train more resources before the project start.
Many times the support escalate to engineer for issue found.
5 out of 5.0, Reviewed May 12, 2016
Good engagement and future roadmap to support life science customers.
overlaying compliance on this kind of platform adds unnecessary overhead.
flexibility, RAD and agility.
building the framework and applying standard and governance is not under EA's control.
separate org. model for life science industry.
May consider the comparison between single org. concepts vs. multiple org concepts. Single org. can add unnecessary constraints and reduce the flexibility of RAD.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Apr 28, 2016
Technology and Implementation selection.
ensure technology and design selection maps to business and IT strategic view of your organziation.
More time allocated for business requirement gathering.