Verdantix green quadrant_energy_management_software_2013

GREEN QUADRANT® ENERGY MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE (GLOBAL)
JANUARY 2013

Verdantix Ltd © 2007-2013. Reproduction Prohibited.

GREEN QUADRANT® ENERGY MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE (GLOBAL)

January 2013 Licensed Content
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides a detailed comparison of 14 enterprise energy management software
applications to help corporate buyers save time, reduce costs and mitigate risks when selecting
products and suppliers. Based on the proprietary Verdantix Green Quadrant methodology, the
analysis combines benchmark data from 14 live product demonstrations, responses to a 134 point
questionnaire and interviews with an independent panel of 15 customers across 13 industries
who have bought, or are planning to buy, energy management software. The study finds that
customers’ requirements are continuing to increase in complexity and five suppliers currently
lead the enterprise energy management software market. When selecting an application, buyers
should focus on the value delivered by the software and supporting energy services. Successful
implementations usually occur when suppliers design software for a specific energy domain,
such as data centres, grocery retail or commercial offices, with the facilities owned by the
customer.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE STATE OF THE ENERGY MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE MARKET
Software Continues To Drive The Uptake Of Enterprise Energy Management

BUYERS INCREASE SPENDING FOR APPS THAT OPTIMIZE ENERGY PERFORMANCE
Energy Decision-Makers Have To Manage Energy Costs And Increased Volumes Of Energy
Data
Buyers Scale Up Investments In Energy Management Software
Requirements Increase As Buyers Move From Measuring To Managing Energy
Buyers Are Still Searching For Higher Levels Of Sophistication In Data Analytics
Suppliers Must Demonstrate Scale, Integration And Domain Expertise To Win Buyer
Confidence
Buyers Prefer Suppliers With In-House Energy Expertise For Software Implementation

GREEN QUADRANT® ENERGY MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE
Green Quadrant® Methodology
Evaluated Suppliers: Selection Criteria
Evaluation Criteria For Energy Management Software
CA Technologies, IBM and Schneider Electric Set The Bar High For Energy Management
Software

© 2013 Verdantix Ltd. All Rights Reserved. Verdantix, Green Quadrant, Total Portfolio and Critical Moments are
trademarks of Verdantix Ltd. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. Verdantix clients
may make one attributed copy of each figure or paragraph contained herein. Additional reproduction is strictly
prohibited.

Verdantix Ltd © 2007-2013. Reproduction Prohibited. 2

Five Suppliers Emerge As Serious Contenders
Six Suppliers Offer Targeted Energy Domain Expertise

USER REQUIREMENTS SHOULD DRIVE SOFTWARE PURCHASE DECISIONS

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Three Phases Of Energy Management Software Market Development
Figure 2. Ranking Of Business Drivers For Purchasing Energy Management Software
Figure 3. Priority Energy Management Initiatives Over The Next Two Years
Figure 4. Annual Change In Spend On Energy Management Software By 2015
Figure 5. Functionality Requirements For Energy Management Software
Figure 6. Important Attributes Of Energy Management Software Suppliers
Figure 7. Preferences For Different Types Of Software Suppliers
Figure 8. Preferences For Different Types Of Implementation Services Providers
Figure 9. List Of The Suppliers And Software Assessed
Figure 10-1. Capabilities Criteria For Energy Management Software Suppliers
Figure 11. Momentum Criteria For Energy Management Software Suppliers
Figure 12. Green Quadrant® Energy Management Software
Figure 13-1. Capability Scores For 14 Energy Management Software Suppliers
Figure 14. Momentum Scores For 14 Energy Management Software Suppliers

ORGANIZATIONS MENTIONED
1E, 4tell, ABB, Accenture, AkzoNobel, Alstom, Asda, AspenTech, Atos, Avaya, Building Automation
Solutions, Bloomberg, BuildingIQ, C3, CA Technologies, Calico Energy, Capgemini, Carbon
Disclosure Project, CarbonSystems, Cenovus Energy, CH2M HILL, Cisco, City of Des Moines,
CloudApps, Coles, Colliers International, Cooper Industries, Costco, CRedit360, Dell, Deloitte,
Deutsche Telekom, Dow Chemical, Eaton, eBay, Ecova, Elster EnergyICT, Emerson, Enablon,
Energenz, Energy Advantage, Energy And Technical Services, Energy Metering Technology, Energy
Quote JHA, Energy Solutions Group, EnergyCAP, EnergyPrint, EnerNOC, EnTech USB, Enviance,
ENXSuite, ERM, eSight Energy, ESS, Faronics, Fellon-McCord, FirstCarbon Solutions, GameStop, GE,
GridPoint, Hara, Hasbro, Honeywell, HP, Husky Energy, IBM, ICF International, ICIS, Iconics, IHS,
Infor, Infosys, InStep Software, Interval Data Systems, IMServ, Johnson Controls, Jones Lang LaSalle,
JouleX, Locus Technologies, Logica, M&C Energy Group, Matrix, Microsoft, MicroStrategy, Noesis
Energy, Novar, Noveda Technologies, Optima Energy Management, Optimal Energy Solutions,
Oracle, Orange, OSIsoft, Pace Global, PE International, Phoenix Energy Technologies, Powerit
Solutions, ProcessMAP, Pulse Energy, QAS, Raritan, Retroficiency, Rockwell Automation, RSMeans,
Sacramento Municipal Utility District, Safeway, Sainsbury's, SAP, SAS, Scanenergi, Schneider Electric,
SCIenergy, SEDAC Energy Management, Sentilla, Serious Energy, Siemens, sMeasure, Spectra
Energy, Stark, StratITsphere, Summit Energy, Sustainable Real Estate Solutions, Swisscom, Target,
TEAM, Tesco, Trendpoint, Tridium, TRIRIGA, URS Corporation, US Air Force, US Bank, US
Department of Defense, US General Services Administration, Utilyx, Valero, Verco, Verdiem, Verisae,
Verismic, Vizelia, Vodafone, Walmart, Wipro EcoEnergy

© 2013 Verdantix Ltd. All Rights Reserved. Verdantix, Green Quadrant, Total Portfolio and Critical Moments are
trademarks of Verdantix Ltd. All other trademarks are the property of their respective companies. Verdantix clients
may make one attributed copy of each figure or paragraph contained herein. Additional reproduction is strictly
prohibited.


VERDANTIX — GREEN QUADRANT® ENERGY MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE

Many large firms have launched a strategic energy management programme to better manage
growing energy costs, mitigate security of supply risks and benefit from the potential of
decentralized electricity generation as well as renewable energy technologies. A more
strategic approach to energy management means elevating policies and investments to the
level of the CEO and CFO. Coordinating this programme requires enterprise-wide data held
in a single system of record that permits timely analysis and reporting. Buyers in this market
face a diverse range of software suppliers spanning enterprise software providers, equipment
and controls firms, energy consultants and services firms. To help buyers save time and
money in the software selection process, as well as reduce risk in purchase decisions,
Verdantix conducted an independent, fact-based analysis of the 14 enterprise energy
management software suppliers with the strongest claims to support global deployments.

THE STATE OF THE ENERGY MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE MARKET
This report helps senior executives and decision-makers across all industries to select a
software provider to help them manage their firm’s energy supply, consumption and cost
from the facility to the enterprise level. These roles include Chief Sustainability Officers,
CFOs, Directors of Energy and Facilities and Heads of Procurement. Key questions include:

 Which software applications are available in the market today to help achieve my
firm’s energy-related business objectives?

 Which energy management software applications are best suited to my firm’s facility
portfolio?

 Which suppliers lead the market for enterprise energy management software?

 What criteria should I use to shortlist suppliers of enterprise energy management
software?

To answer these questions, Verdantix interviewed an independent customer panel composed
of 15 current or potential users of enterprise energy management software, representing firms
with combined revenues of $340 billion. For the software application analysis, we interviewed
14 suppliers, conducted 14 live product demonstrations, and collected comprehensive product
and company data on 134 criteria via a questionnaire. The resulting analysis is based on the
proprietary Verdantix Green Quadrant methodology designed to provide an evidence-based,
objective assessment of suppliers providing comparable products or services.

Software Continues To Drive The Uptake Of Enterprise Energy Management
The enterprise energy management software market follows the typical trajectory of all new
categories of enterprise software: growth, consolidation and maturity. The market’s
development can be characterized as follows (see Figure 1):

 Proliferation of tactical energy management software from the 1990s. For many years
energy software deployments focused on a single site or a single energy domain as



Figure 1. Three Phases Of Energy Management Software Market Development

1990-2007 2008-2014 2015-2020

Consolidated market
Number of Rapid growth of site level Arrival of enterprise-scale
combined with niche
Suppliers applications applications
solutions
SUPPLIER

Software One to two energy
Energy domain specific Energy systems
Domain Focus domains

Offered through partner Full in-house energy
Services None
network services capabilities

Head of energy, head of
Buying Role Site manager facilities or head of Corporate executive
property
CUSTOMER

Project, portfolio and
Data aggregation and Cost reduction and energy
Purchase Drivers strategic risk
consolidation efficiency
management

Business unit,
Deployment Scale Site, plant, national Enterprise
international

Source: Verdantix

energy management was devolved to the plant manager or building manager. In each
industry, suppliers such as EnTech USB and Optimal Energy Solutions offered
applications for monitoring and targeting, and data management. These applications
were offered with client/server architectures that could scale up to users at a single site,
but were not designed for enterprise deployment. The value proposition for the
software was tied to data collection, processing and back-office bill validation services.
Many suppliers were not software specialists.

 Arrival of enterprise-scale apps responding to strategic energy management. As firms
started to move towards multi-site implementations, a new software category emerged.
The key elements of enterprise scalability include software-as-a-service (SaaS)
architecture or web-based access, flexible organizational hierarchy designs and open
application programme interfaces (APIs). These applications allow users to drill down
from a corporate-wide view of energy information into specific geographies, business



lines or asset categories. In 2008 and 2009, 40 energy management software apps were
launched into the global market (see Verdantix Buyers’ Guide To Energy Management
Software). Entrants such as C3 and Hara now aim value propositions at CFOs and line-of-
business managers, as well as facilities and operation managers. The focus for the software
is on large-scale energy efficiency savings, enhanced security of supply over the next 10
years, and a more accurate data set for energy consumption and GHG reporting and
reductions.

 Maturing market through acquisition. Diverse suppliers, spanning energy services
providers, equipment and controls suppliers and ICT providers, are acquiring specialist
expertise to enhance their technology capabilities, broaden energy domain focus and gain
market share before a global shakeout begins. During 2011 market consolidation began
with IBM acquiring TRIRIGA, Schneider Electric acquiring Summit Energy, Infor acquiring
ENXSuite and Siemens acquiring Pace Global (see Verdantix Software Acquisitions Provide
Boost To Energy Services). Enterprise energy management software is evolving to serve as
the integration platform for end-point energy devices, monitoring and control systems and
external content feeds such as utility bills and energy price data.

 Expansion into platform-based energy services. Energy management will continue its
migration from a tactical to strategic approach as firms raise governance to a global level,
make decisions centrally, gain greater control over energy management processes and
invest in on-site generation. The scale and complexity will shift from individual energy
domains – data centres or retail stores for example – to integrated energy systems (see
Verdantix The Future Of Energy Management). Firms will lack the in-house teams with an
appropriate set of skills to manage the energy system, so they will turn to suppliers to
provide end-to-end energy management. Enterprise energy management software will
evolve to serve as a platform for energy integration, energy intelligence and energy
services. Leading suppliers will integrate software and services to become a platform-based
energy services provider that can cater for a firm’s end-to-end energy requirements, from
energy procurement and on-site generation to private smart grid and demand-side
management.

BUYERS INCREASE SPENDING FOR APPS THAT OPTIMIZE ENERGY
PERFORMANCE
Long-standing suppliers and new entrants are now developing capabilities to respond to firms’
ever-growing requirements to manage, report and optimize their energy performance. To drill
down into purchase preferences and functionality requirements for energy management
software, Verdantix interviewed an independent panel of budget holders in 15 global firms with
over $1 billion in revenue. The firms were located in Africa, Canada, Mexico, Netherlands, the UK
and the US, and represented 13 industries: automotive, banking, business services, chemicals,
food and beverage, industrial engineering, media, personal and household, pharma and medical,
public sector, retail, technology and telecommunications. Within these firms we spoke with
decision-makers in roles such as Global Head of Sustainability, Director of Sustainable
Operations and Director for Energy and Carbon Programmes.



Figure 2. Ranking Of Business Drivers For Purchasing Energy Management Software

“What are the business drivers for purchasing energy management software?”

Cost savings 67%

Energy targets 40%

Financial data tracking 33%

Carbon management 27%

Reporting 27%

Increased visibility 20%

Environmental impact 20%

Project analysis 13%

Data normalization 13%

Regulatory compliance 13%

Data consolidation 7%

Time savings 7%

Source: Verdantix N=15

Energy Decision-Makers Have To Manage Energy Costs And Increased
Volumes Of Energy Data
Verdantix asked respondents in the customer panel to characterize their firms’ energy
programmes to better understand the drivers for enterprise energy management software
investment. We heard that senior managers responsible for energy management decision-
making:

 Implement energy management software today. Twelve members of the 15-strong
customer panel have already purchased software to manage energy consumption.
Verdantix analysis heard that only seven of these deployments cover more than 100 sites
and more than one energy domain, with three firms having deployed energy
management software across more than 8,000 sites. The three respondents that have not
implemented energy management software are still using spreadsheets to monitor
energy consumption.

"We have now implemented energy management software within our office and retail sites in
North America. The ROI that has been achieved exceeded expectations and we are now looking to
implement the solution across our sites in Europe and China." (Personal and household firm)

 Identify cost savings as the number one purchase driver. Ten of the 15 panellists
indicated that the ability to identify cost savings topped the list of reasons to purchase
energy management software (see Figure 2). Six firms consider the ability to set and



Figure 3. Priority Energy Management Initiatives Over The Next Two Years

“What are your firm's top energy management initiatives over the next two years?”

Equipment replacement 47%

Data analysis 47%

Building controls 33%

On-site renewable energy 27%

Smart meters 20%

Strategic planning 20%

Software implementation 20%

Employee behaviour change 13%

Carbon and energy reporting 13%
Energy consuming asset
maintenance 7%

Supply chain 7%


track energy targets to be a significant driver, while five firms mentioned financial data
tracking as a considerable driver.

“Financial benefits are the main driving force for us at the moment; we want to do the right thing
but we need a favourable return on our investments. We need to verify claimed savings by
ensuring we have metering data from before and after changes are made to form a true picture of
the economic impact.” (Chemicals firm)

 Prioritize energy efficient equipment and energy data analysis. Seven of the members
of the customer panel listed increased energy data analytics and upgrading inefficient
legacy equipment in their top three energy management initiatives for the next two
years (see Figure 3). Verdantix research shows that 28% of firms’ energy management
spend in 2012 will be on equipment (see Verdantix Energy Leaders Survey 2012:
Budgets and Priorities). In December 2011 the US Department of Defense awarded
Johnson Controls a $34 million energy services performance contract that will cover the
installation of wind and solar photovoltaic systems, LED lighting, energy management
control systems and other energy conservation equipment over 16 years (see Verdantix
US Department Of Defense Deploys Energy Management At Scale).

“We are looking to upgrade a lot of our legacy equipment within our manufacturing facilities.
We have identified the ‘big spenders’ and are now replacing these with new energy efficient
versions. We replaced a legacy oven with a purpose built version that uses 50% less gas; we are
also looking at installing CHP.” (Industrial engineering firm)



Figure 4. Annual Change In Spend On Energy Management Software By 2015

“How much do you expect your firm's year-on-year spend on energy management software
to change over the next three years?”

13%
20%
Increase by more than 25%

Increase up to 25%

20%
Stay the same

Decrease up to 25%

Decrease by more than 25%
47%


Buyers Scale Up Investments In Energy Management Software
Potential cost savings achieved through improvements in energy management drive firms to
invest in software. To analyse purchasing trends, Verdantix asked the customer panel to
describe its spending on energy management software. Verdantix heard that:

 Software price tags vary significantly. When asked how much their firm has spent on
energy management software over the past three years, responses from the customer
panel ranged from $50,000 to over $5 million. Firms that have already implemented
energy management software attribute the majority of spending to licensing and hosting
fees that are proportional to the scale of the deployment. Firms in the early stages of
deployment attribute the greatest proportion of costs to software implementation and
consulting services.

“We had significant upfront costs during implementation. Going forward we now only have
licensing fees to pay.” (Telecommunications firm)

 Most firms will increase spend on energy management software over the next three
years. Two thirds of respondents expect spend on energy management software to
increase on an annual basis through to 2015, with a fifth saying it will increase by more
than 25% (see Figure 4). Respondents expecting spend to increase are about to
implement a new solution or are in the process of rolling-out a solution across more of
their facilities. Only 13% of customer panel respondents expect spend on energy



management software to decrease. Firms that expect spend to decrease are those that have
just finished implementing a new solution and have no plans in place to increase
functionality or scope during the next three years. Firms already in a multi-year contract
with an energy management software provider expect spend to stay the same as annual
licensing fees account for the majority of their spend.

“We feel as if we have finally turned the corner, with key senior executives beginning to understand
that there may be more value to energy management than previously thought. Our investment in
active energy management is anticipated to increase, especially as we build new data
centres.” (Telecommunications firm)

Requirements Increase As Buyers Move From Measuring To Managing Energy
Two thirds of customer panel respondents expect their annual spend on energy management
software to increase during the next three years as they implement new solutions, roll out
existing solutions on a larger scale, or increase the functionality of existing solutions. When
questioned on what energy management functionality customers require, Verdantix heard that
(see Figure 5):

 Utility bill management has risen to the top of the priority list. Twelve out of 15 customer
panel respondents require utility bill management tools. This category of functionality
includes energy supplier management, utility account tracking, utility bill validation, utility
bill accruals, multi-tenant billing, energy rebate validation and chargebacks. For example,
US video game retailer GameStop selected Ecova’s Utility Expense And Data Management
platform to manage its 12,000 utility accounts in 2008, and after just one year projected
ongoing annual savings of $734,000.

“We have come to the realization that utilities are the biggest expense for our group - to get better
data on this and begin to reduce our expenses is a high priority for us.” (Bank)

 Monitoring and targeting is essential. The entire customer panel said that they require or
desire energy monitoring and targeting tools. This category of functionality includes target
setting and tracking, trend analysis and forecasting, facilities benchmarking and
identification of energy efficiency opportunities. In May 2012, the US General Services
Administration selected IBM TRIRIGA to monitor the energy consumption of more than 32
million square feet of real estate, to help it meet its goal of reducing energy consumption in
federal buildings by 30% by 2015.

“You can't manage what you can't see; we spend £300 million ($486 million) on utilities in the UK
alone.” (Retail)

 Reporting and certification are sought after. Eleven members of the customer panel require
energy reporting and certification functionality from energy management software
applications. Linked to this, nine require carbon reporting and certification tools for
emissions disclosure to organizations such as the Carbon Disclosure Project. This category
of functionality includes configurable reporting along with mandatory and voluntary
reporting. IT services firm Capgemini states that CA Technologies’ CA ecoSoftware has
reduced the costs associated with creating reports by approximately 30%.



Figure 5. Functionality Requirements For Energy Management Software

“To what extent do you require the following energy management software functionality?”

Utility bill management 80% 7% 7% 7%

Energy monitoring and
targeting 73% 27%

Energy reporting and
certification 73% 20% 7%

Energy asset management 67% 7% 27%

Energy project and portfolio
management 60% 27% 7% 7%

Carbon reporting and
certification 60% 20% 7% 13%

Energy procurement and risk
management 40% 13% 40% 7%

Required Desirable Not Required Undecided
Note: data labels are rounded to zero decimal places so may not sum to 100%

“The approaching nexus of financial, sustainability, and energy reporting is going to have a big
impact on our energy management software requirements over the next 12 months. We will need
to be able to report energy performance with the same frequency and accuracy as we do financial
data.” (Personal and household firm)

 Requirements for energy asset management vary by energy domain. Ten of the
respondents said that their firm requires energy asset management functionality; one
said it is desirable and the remaining four said it is not required. Verdantix heard that
this functionality is attractive to industries such as automotive and manufacturing as
they operate a large number of high energy-consuming assets. This category includes
control of energy consuming and generating assets, maintenance scheduling, condition
assessment, demand response and problem diagnosis. Monitoring the condition of
equipment and calculating when it is better to maintain or replace assets results in
significant cost savings. For example, the City of Des Moines implemented Infor10 EAM
within its waste water facilities in January 2011. After only six months it had reduced
energy consumption by 100 GWh with annual savings of $200,000.

“I am looking for greater intelligence around energy efficiency identification. I want energy
management software to identify/predict when an asset is operating at non-optimal
capacity.” (Telecommunications firm)

 Project and portfolio management is desirable. Nine members of the customer panel
require project and portfolio management functionality from energy management



software applications. A further four said this functionality would be useful for
on-going energy efficiency or energy generation projects, but is not immediately required.
This category of functionality includes equipment selection, project planning and analysis,
and portfolio planning and analysis.

“We knew we were about to implement a number of energy efficiency projects and wanted to verify
the results independent of weather conditions.” (Public sector)

 Requirements for energy procurement depend on existing arrangements with specialists.
Six members of the customer panel said that they require energy procurements tools;
another six said that this functionality is not required. This category of functionality
includes procurement process management, tariff and cost analysis, risk management and
scenario planning. The split in opinion as to whether or not this functionality is required
depends on whether or not firms already cater for this – either through their own finance
and procurement teams or outsourced specialists such as M&C Energy Group and Utilyx.

“We have a specialist supplier that takes care of utility bill management and procurement for our
firm. It does not have good reporting and project analysis capabilities so we have also invested in
energy management software. It would be too much upheaval to transfer everything into the one
system and we do not see it as being necessary.” (Pharmaceutical firm)

Buyers Are Still Searching For Higher Levels Of Sophistication In Data
Analytics
As firms’ requirements continue to increase and market leading capabilities become the norm,
suppliers must continue to ‘out innovate’ their competitors. When questioned on what energy
management functionality customers will require going forward, Verdantix heard that firms will
require:

 Integration with other business systems to enhance business performance. Seven
customer panel respondents would like to see energy management software incorporate
greater levels of non-energy related data in the next 12 months. Respondents understand
that energy consumption depends on a number of variables, such as weather conditions,
occupancy levels and production schedules. Respondents increasingly look to understand
the relationship between non-energy related information and energy consumption to
identify trends that could result in energy savings or assist in strategic business planning
(see Verdantix Smart Innovators: Big Energy Data Software).

“I want to see greater interaction with utilities and internal management systems that may not be
directly related with energy consumption such as financial or production management systems. I
should be able to view energy consumption alongside a whole host of other metrics to better
understand how energy impacts other areas of my business.” (Chemicals firm)

 Increased automation and analytics. Five members of the customer panel mentioned that
they would like to see more advanced data analytics to help them prioritize and resolve
issues rather than simply identify them. Buyers that have a history of monitoring energy
consumption are now looking to move to the next level and start managing energy more
effectively. Respondents expect energy management software to reduce the amount of
effort required to manage facilities from an energy standpoint, achieving this through



increased automation and intelligent alerting.

“I want to see greater automation with regards to the control of assets and reporting. I do not want to
have to babysit the solution running reports and then look for issues. Instead I want the software to
automate solutions and interact with me when it discovers a potential issue that requires my
attention. The software needs to be intelligent enough to know when to generate reports and alarms
etc.” (Industrial engineering firm)

 Software that can maximize the value of having real-time energy data. Eleven members of
the customer panel do not currently require real-time energy data. All 15 respondents said
that they do not require real-time data across all facilities, but do see where it does/could
add value within manufacturing plants or data centres, for example. The most common
reason for not requiring real-time data is that firms do not have the internal resources to act
upon the information. Panel members highlighted this as one area they would like to see
greater developments from software suppliers. Respondents would like to see energy
management software that can intelligently act upon real-time data, rather than just flag
potential issues to users.

“I can see the benefit in having information in real-time however my maintenance department does
not have the resources to react in real-time so would not experience the associated benefits of having
real-time information. If the system could prioritize work orders and intelligently incorporate them
into the existing daily schedule based on priority then that could be of interest.” (Chemicals firm)

Suppliers Must Demonstrate Scale, Integration And Domain Expertise To Win
Buyer Confidence
The number of customers that now require the seven energy management functionalities assessed
in this study has increased across all functionalities between 2011 and 2012, reflecting the
increasing expectations that customers have from energy management software. Verdantix heard
that buyers look for specific supplier attributes, in addition to product attributes, when
shortlisting software suppliers. Verdantix heard that customers (see Figure 6):

 Expect previous experience of global rollouts. One of the primary criteria that customers
look for when selecting an energy management software supplier is previous enterprise
deployments across at least several hundred sites spanning multiple countries. The entire
customer panel said this was an important factor, reflecting preferences for solutions to
match the expanding scale of their energy management programmes.

 Demand proven integration with hardware and equipment systems. Respondents show a
strong preference towards suppliers’ ability to show previous integration successes with
meters and controls. Fourteen members of the customer panel said that this was either
important or very important. Integration across multiple energy domains is complex
because it requires integration with meters, Building Management Systems (BMS) and
lighting systems within commercial buildings, Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
Systems (SCADA) within manufacturing facilities, and Uninterruptible Power Supply
(UPS) units, servers and racks within data centres. Software can integrate with these
systems in near real-time through pre-built connectors with data historians or customized
APIs and offer two-way connectivity with the equipment allowing assets to be controlled
remotely.



Figure 6. Important Attributes Of Energy Management Software Suppliers

“How important are/were the following attributes of a software supplier in your
selection process?”

An existing deployment that covers at
least four countries and 400 sites 80% 20%

Proven integration with meters and
controls across data centres, commercial 87% 7% 7%
buildings and industrial plants
Domain expertise to offer effective
60% 33% 7%
solutions within a particular sector

Financial resources to compete effectively
20% 67% 13%
over the next two years

Proven ability to deliver value through
53% 13% 27% 7%
consumption reduction and cost reduction

Quality of commercial partnerships with
other firms or organizations 13% 33% 33% 20%

Offices in at least 3 countries 20% 7% 40% 33%

High brand awareness 13% 13% 27% 47%

Very Important Important Neutral Unimportant

Note: data labels are rounded to zero decimal places so may not sum to 100%, data ranked by sum of first two responses

 Push for an industry-specific track record. Fourteen of the respondents from the
customer panel said that a successful and proven industry track record was either very
important or important. Customers acknowledge that energy management
requirements can vary widely across industry sectors. For example the banking sector
has different energy-related equipment, energy consumption patterns and operational
processes from that of the automotive sector. In a mature market suppliers will be able
to provide business cases, case studies, or at least anonymous references from satisfied
customers as a proof of point experience.

 Downplay brand recognition during the selection process. Only two members of the
customer panel acknowledged the importance of high brand awareness when choosing
a potential energy management software supplier. Verdantix surveyed 250 corporate
energy decision-makers on brand preferences on different energy management software
suppliers and found technology brands such as IBM and SAP garner higher levels of
awareness and engagement than smaller, specialist energy management software firms
such as C3 and Hara. This group of budget holders also harbours positive perceptions of
the energy management software capabilities of building automation and controls
suppliers such as Johnson Controls and Schneider Electric (see Verdantix Global Energy
Leaders Survey 2012: Brands).



Figure 7. Preferences For Different Types Of Software Suppliers

“Which category of supplier would you prefer to buy energy management software from?”
(Rank in order of preference from 1 to 5, with 1 as the highest preference)

Specialist software firm 40% 40% 13% 7%

Specialist energy services
firm with software 33% 7% 7% 27% 27%

Large software firm 13% 20% 27% 7% 33%

Equipment and controls firm
with software 7% 27% 20% 33% 13%

Large technology firm
with software 7% 7% 33% 27% 27%

1 2 3 4 5


Buyers Prefer Suppliers With In-House Energy Expertise For Software
Implementation
Buyers look for suppliers that can demonstrate previous global deployments, a successful
industry track record and proven integration with data sources. But when faced with a
spectrum of choice, buyers find it difficult to choose amongst different categories of software
suppliers. When Verdantix asked the customer panel which type of suppliers they preferred
to buy software and implementation services from, we heard that buyers:

 Prefer to buy from specialist software and services suppliers. Twelve members of the
customer panel said they would prefer to buy energy management software from
specialist software suppliers focused on energy management, such as CarbonSystems or
Verisae (see Figure 7). The next highest preference is to buy directly from an energy
services specialist such as EnerNOC. Buyers look for suppliers to provide specialist
capabilities, beyond software provision, such as getting data into the system and
advising on how to analyse the data to save on energy costs.

 De-prioritize large software, equipment and technology suppliers. Five respondents
said they would prefer to buy energy management software from large software firms,
with only two selecting it as their first choice. Another five panel members said they
would prefer to buy energy management software from equipment and controls
suppliers, with only one respondent selecting this as their first choice. Verdantix heard
several respondents were tentative about purchasing energy management software



Figure 8. Preferences For Different Types Of Implementation Services Providers

“Who would you prefer to implement energy management software?”
(Rank in order of preference from 1 to 4, with 1 as the highest preference)

Software supplier 47% 13% 13% 27%

My firm's IT function/
outsourcer 27% 40% 13% 20%

IT systems integrator 20% 20% 40% 20%

Engineering/energy
consultant 7% 27% 33% 33%

1 2 3 4


from equipment and controls suppliers such as Eaton, Emerson and Honeywell as they
perceived their energy management software as another channel through which to sell
equipment and/or services.

 Prefer software suppliers to technical consultants as implementation partners.
Verdantix heard that seven panel members prefer the software suppliers to deliver the
implementation of energy management software (see Figure 8). Several respondents
cited time and cost savings as a reason for this preference. In terms of preferences for
external implementation partners, three respondents favour IT integrators such as
Capgemini and Deloitte, while one respondent prefers engineering firms such as CH2M
HILL and URS. Regardless of who is selected to implement the software we heard that
customers require: greater support to customize software configuration in the early
stages of installation; greater input into product development; and greater
communication between project management teams during implementation.

 Increasingly look for in-house teams to be included in implementation efforts.
Respondents to this year’s customer panel are in favour of using their own firm’s IT
function to implement energy management software; this was cited as the least
favourable option in the 2011 study. Verdantix heard that some customers have
struggled because they underestimated the internal resources required to select,
implement and operate energy management software and no longer want the IT
function to play a peripheral role.



Based on the insights provided by the independent customer panel and our in-depth interviews
with suppliers, Verdantix defines energy management software as:

Enterprise-scale software that enables firms to monitor, analyse and reduce energy
consumption across commercial buildings, data centres, industrial plants, on-site energy
generation, as well as stationary and mobile fuel sources.

This definition does not include software designed to be deployed on a site-by-site basis or with a
focus solely on carbon, EH&S or other sustainability metrics. Previous Verdantix research shows
that environmental management and sustainability management software applications differ in
usage scenarios, user groups and functionality; they are not suitable to be included in this Green
Quadrant study.

Green Quadrant® Methodology
The Verdantix Green Quadrant methodology provides buyers of a specific product or service
with a structured assessment of comparable offerings at a certain point in time. The methodology
supports purchase decisions by identifying potential suppliers, structuring relevant purchase
criteria through discussions with buyers, and providing evidence-based assessments of the
products and services in the market. To ensure the objectivity and accuracy of the results of the
study, the research process is based on the following principles and activities:

 Transparent inclusion. We aim to analyse all suppliers that qualify for inclusion in the
research. For those suppliers that decline our invitation or fail to respond, we aim to include
them in the report based on public information where this would provide an accurate
analysis of their market positioning.

 Analysis from the buyer’s perspective. We recruit a panel of individuals who have bought
or plan to buy the product or service analysed in the Green Quadrant. Their role is to define
relevant buying criteria and to weight the evaluation criteria in the model that drives the
Green Quadrant graphic.

 Reliance on professional integrity. Since it is not feasible to check all of the data and claims
made by suppliers, we emphasize the need for professional integrity. Assertions made by
suppliers are put in the public domain in the Verdantix report and can be checked by
competitors and existing customers.

 Scores based on evidence. To assess the expertise, resources, business results and strategy
of suppliers, we gather evidence from public sources and conduct interviews with multiple
spokespeople and with industry experts. When suppliers claim to be ‘best-in-class’ we
challenge them to present the evidence.

 Comparison based on relative capabilities. We construct measurement scales based on
‘worst-in-class’ and ‘best-in-class’ performance at a certain point in time. A supplier’s
position in the market can change over time depending on how its offering and success
evolves compared to competitors. Green Quadrants are typically repeated once a year.



Evaluated Suppliers: Selection Criteria
To ensure the Green Quadrant analysis only compares suppliers providing similar products or
services, we define inclusion criteria. The software suppliers included in this study were chosen
because their applications have:

 Enterprise-scale product architecture. This study only considers applications designed to
scale up to multi-country, multi-site deployments for an enterprise with annual revenues
greater than $1 billion. All suppliers provided evidence of a customer implementation with
users in at least four countries and across at least 400 sites.

 Proven integration with meters and controls. To deliver cost savings, energy management
software needs to integrate with a wide range of assets. The Green Quadrant analysis
assesses automated data capture across four sources: 1) controls, equipment and meters in
buildings; 2) equipment and meters in data centres and networks; 3) controls and meters in
manufacturing plants; 4) primary energy and on-site generation.

 Core energy management functionality. This study targets enterprise-class apps with a
broad set of functionality. Each application must, at a minimum, have functionality for
automated data capture, master data management, workflow and task management, energy
monitoring and targeting, and carbon reporting.

In addition to the product attributes, Verdantix included only those suppliers with:

 Offices in at least three different countries. This criterion reflects the need to support
international deployments.

 Resources to compete effectively in the market in the next two years. This criterion maps
to customer demands for implementation and financial stability.

 Evidence of enterprise deployments for global firms with revenues of at least $1bn. This
criterion maps to customer demands for evidence of enterprise implementation capabilities.

This report compares 14 energy management software suppliers (see Figure 9). All software
suppliers included in this study actively participated through interviews, product
demonstrations and responses to a 134-point detailed questionnaire. The following suppliers of
energy management software did not meet the inclusion criteria: 1E, 4tell, ABB, Alstom,
AspenTech, Building Automation Solutions, BuildingIQ, Calico Energy, CloudApps, Cooper
Industries, Eaton, Ecova, Emerson, Enablon, Energy Advantage, Energy And Technical Services,
Energy Metering Technology, EnergyCAP, Energy Points, Energy Solutions Group, EnergyPrint,
EnTech USB, Enviance, eSight Energy, Faronics, FirstCarbon Solutions, GE, Honeywell, ICIS,
Iconics, IMServ, InStep Software, Interval Data Systems, Locus Technologies, Microsoft, Noesis
Energy, Novar, Noveda Technologies, Optima Energy Management, Optimal Energy Solutions,
Oracle, OSIsoft, Phoenix Energy Technologies, Powerit Solutions, ProcessMAP, Pulse Energy,
QAS, Raritan, Retroficiency, Rockwell Automation, SAS, Scanenergi, SCIenergy, Sentilla, Serious
Energy, sMeasure, Stark, Sustainable Real Estate Solutions, TEAM, Tridium, Verco Global,
Verdiem, and Verismic. C3, CRedit360, EnerNOC and PE International qualified for this study
but declined to participate.



Figure 9. Suppliers And Software Assessed

Supplier Software

CA Data Center Infrastructure Management (DCIM), CA ecoDesktop, CA
CA Technologies
ecoGovernance, CA ecoMeter

CarbonSystems Sustainability Resource Management (SRM) Platform

Elster EnergyICT EIServer

GridPoint GridPoint Energy Manager

Hara Hara Total Resource Performance Management

IBM TRIRIGA (10.3), Tivoli Monitoring for Energy Management (6.3), IBM
IBM Systems Director Active Energy Manager (4.1), IBM Maximo Asset
Management for Energy Optimization (7.1)

IHS IHS Energy & Carbon Solution

Infor Infor Enterprise Asset Management (EAM)

Johnson Controls Panoptix

JouleX JouleX Energy Manager (JEM)

SAP Energy and Environmental Resource Management

Schneider Electric Energy Operation, Resource Advisor, StruxureWare

Siemens Energy Monitoring And Control (EMC), Pace ECM

Verisae Sustainability Resource Planning (SRP)

Source: Verdantix

Evaluation Criteria For Energy Management Software
Verdantix defined the evaluation criteria using a combination of existing domain expertise
from the 2010 and 2011 Green Quadrant studies, interviews with customers, services firms
and software suppliers (see Verdantix Green Quadrant Energy Management Software
(Global) 2011). The Green Quadrant analysis compares offerings from 14 software suppliers
using 134 weighted criteria grouped under the following categories:

 Capabilities. This dimension, captured in the vertical axis of the Green Quadrant
graphic, measures each software supplier on the breadth and depth of its software
functionality. To assess performance on this dimension Verdantix collected data on 103
criteria grouped into 18 areas: commercial and retail building energy data capture, data
centre and ICT energy data capture, industrial and manufacturing plant energy data
capture, primary energy and on-site generation data capture, IT systems integration and



manual input, market data capture, data architecture and scalability, master data
management, workflow and task management, security and data audit,
internationalization, utility bill management, energy procurement and risk management,
energy monitoring and targeting, energy asset management, project and portfolio
management, carbon reporting and analysis, and energy reporting and analysis.

 Market momentum. This dimension, captured in the horizontal axis of the Green Quadrant
graphic, measures each software supplier on a range of strategic success factors including
publicly announced customers and internal sustainability performance. The 31 criteria
included in this axis are grouped into seven areas: market vision and sustainability, product
strategy and architecture, customer momentum, implementation and value, organizational
resources, financial resources, and partnerships.

The evidence provided by each supplier is captured in a quantitative model. Each top-level
criterion is broken down into sub-criteria. Taking the energy monitoring and targeting capability
section as an example, the sub-criteria are: 1) target setting and tracking (25%); 2) trend analysis
and forecasting (20%); 3) energy efficiency identification (10%); 4) benchmarking (15%); 5) energy
cost saving analysis tools (20%); and 6) energy budgeting and planning (10%). Each sub-criterion
is awarded a score based on a scale of zero to three. Each top-level criterion is allocated a
weighting that is used to calculate the overall score; these generate the Green Quadrant graphic.
Details on the top-level criterion are provided in Figure 10-1, Figure 10-2 and Figure 11. These
figures also provide (in brackets) the weighting attributed to each top-level criterion in the model.

CA Technologies, IBM And Schneider Electric Set The Bar High For Energy
Management Software
The Green Quadrant analysis segments the market into four quadrants (see Figure 12). Within the
Leaders’ Quadrant, three suppliers stand out: CA Technologies, IBM and Schneider Electric. The
factors that distinguish these suppliers from the other 11 suppliers analysed are:

 Proven integration with meters and controls across multiple energy domains. The leading
three suppliers post high scores for integrating with other software, systems and equipment
to directly capture data across multiple energy domains. CA Technologies achieved the
highest score on data centre and ICT infrastructure data capture (2.8) because of its CA
ecoMeter app’s best-in-class integration capabilities with data centre-specific equipment for
customers such as StratITsphere. Schneider Electric achieved the highest score on industrial
and manufacturing plant data capture (2.4) with best-in-class integration capabilities for
SCADA systems and process historians for sectors such as basic resources and chemicals.
IBM and CA Technologies achieved high scores for commercial and retail building energy
data capture (2.5) because of their best-in-class integration capabilities with BMS and
HVAC control sensors.

 Robust energy monitoring and targeting capabilities. The leading three suppliers scored
highest for energy monitoring and targeting functionality that includes facilities
benchmarking, identification of energy cost savings, and budgeting and forecasting for
energy spend. On this capability, CA Technologies scored the highest overall (2.5)
demonstrating best-in-class capabilities in target setting and tracking, and trend analysis
and forecasting, followed by IBM (2.4) demonstrating best-in-class capabilities in target
setting and tracking, and energy efficiency identification. Elster EnergyICT is the only




CAPABILITIES

Commercial and retail Can the software integrate with energy meters and building management
building energy data systems within commercial buildings? Can the software integrate with HVAC,
capture lighting and refrigeration asset?
(10%)

IT, data centre and Can the software integrate with energy meters, uninterruptible power supply
telecoms energy data units, data centre power monitoring equipment, IT and communications power
capture monitoring equipment and other IT management systems?
(8%)

Industrial and Can the software integrate with energy meters, supervisory control and data
manufacturing plant acquisition systems, manufacturing execution systems and process historians
energy data capture from industrial and manufacturing facilities?
(8%)

Primary energy and How does the software capture oil consumption data, natural gas consumption
on-site generation data, coal consumption data and biomass consumption data? How does the
data capture software capture energy generated on-site and excess energy that is exported
(3%) off-site?

IT systems Can the software integrate with existing IT and communications systems and
integration and third party technology systems? What functionality exists to capture EDI billing
manual input data, spreadsheet data and data from mobile devices? What functionality exists
(8%) to allow users to manually input other energy data?

Market data capture Does the software feed in weather data, utility tariff rates, energy benchmark
(2%) information and data on financial incentives?

Data architecture and What characteristics of the software architecture facilitates real-time data
scalability capture and analysis? What functionality exists for data normalization and
(2%) calculation for large data sets? How scalable is the architecture and what tests
are in place to ensure it matches customer requirements?

Master data What functionality exists to define, configure and change organizational
management hierarchy? How does the software capture and track geographic location
(4%) information?

Workflow and task Can the software account for user-based capabilities? How does the user
management allocate tasks and set alerts? Can the user create customized workflow? Does
(5%) the software contain any pre-built workflow or energy management system
certification workflow?

Figures in brackets represent the weighting given to each criterion in the flexible multi-criteria model that
generates the Green Quadrant graphical analysis.

Source: Verdantix




CAPABILITIES

Security and data What data change controls does the system have? How does the system
audit provide access security? What hosting environment security does the supplier
(1%) provide? What data recovery processes are in place? What tools does the
software contain for data estimation, uncertainty?

Internationalization How many user interface languages does the system support? How many
(3%) currencies does the system support? How many energy metrics does the system
support?

Utility bill What functionality does the software have for supplier management, account
management tracking, bill accruals, utility bill validation, multi-tenant billing for buildings,
(10%) energy rebate validation and chargebacks?

Energy procurement What functionality exists to manage the procurement process, analyse costs and
and risk management tariffs, manage risk associated with procuring energy, plan multiple procurement
(5%) scenarios and manage renewable energy certificates?

Energy monitoring What functionality is there to set energy related targets and track progress
and targeting against those targets, analyse trends and forecast into the future, identify energy
(10%) efficiency opportunities, benchmark facilities, analyse energy cost savings and
budget energy spend?

Energy asset What functionality exists to schedule asset maintenance or predictive
management maintenance, diagnose problems, directly control energy consuming and
(5%) generating assets, demand response, condition assessment and asset power
factor analysis?

Project and portfolio What functionality exists to create energy efficiency or energy generation projects,
management analyse those projects, create a portfolio of projects and effectively plan and
(8%) prioritize those projects?

Carbon reporting and What emissions factors does the software contain? How does the software
analysis capture fugitive emissions? How does the supplier provide emissions accuracy?
(3%) What functionality is provided for the user to report emissions mandatorily and
voluntarily and analyse those emissions?

Energy reporting and What functionality does the software have for mandatory and voluntary energy
analysis reporting? How is the user able to configure reports? How configurable and user
(5%) friendly is the dashboard?


Source: Verdantix



Figure 11. Momentum Criteria For Energy Management Software Suppliers

MOMENTUM

Market vision and What market vision does the firm have? What is the firm’s corporate
sustainability sustainability strategy? Does the firm report its own sustainability data?
(15%)

Product strategy and What is the planned functionality for 2013? How frequently does the firm release
architecture new software? What is the flexibility of the firm’s license model? What is the
(30%) firm’s average deal size? What application architecture options does the firm
have?

Customer momentum How familiar are the customer panel with the firm and its software? How many
(20%) named customers does the firm have? How many have revenues above $1
billion? What is the largest deployment the firm has undertaken?

Implementation and What implementation and process change support does the firm provide? How
value flexible is the software? What energy management services does the supplier
(12.5%) offer? What value does the firm deliver to its customers?

Organizational Where are the firm’s offices located? Where does the firm have hosting
resources facilities? Where does the firm have technical support locations? How many
(7%) employees does the firm have? What domain expertise does the firm have?

Financial resources How much revenue does the firm generate from energy management software?
(3%) What funding has the firm received?

Partnerships What consulting partners does the firms have? What systems integrators does
(12.5%) the firm partner with? What technology suppliers does the firm partner with?


Source: Verdantix

supplier outside of the Leaders’ Quadrant that scored as highly (2.1), with best-in-class
scores for target setting and tracking, and trend analysis and forecasting.

 Advanced energy efficiency project and portfolio management tools. Only the leading
three scored above a 2.0 for project and portfolio management functionality: IBM scored
the highest overall (2.8), followed by CA Technologies (2.7) and Schneider Electric (2.2).
IBM stood out amongst its peers for its best-in-class capabilities in energy equipment
specification and selection by providing model and asset-specific equipment data from
US construction data provider RSMeans to help customers estimate equipment costs
when budgeting energy efficiency projects. The CA ecoGovernance app stands out from
the crowd in this category with functionality such as phase-gate methodologies,
hierarchical project relationship management and in-depth financial and energy
efficiency project analysis. Schneider Electric and GridPoint achieved best-in-class scores
for on-site energy generation project planning.



Figure 12. Green Quadrant® Energy Management Software

CHALLENGERS LEADERS

CA Technologies
IBM
Schneider Electric

CarbonSystems

Siemens
CAPABILITIES

Verisae
Johnson Controls

Hara Elster EnergyICT
GridPoint SAP
IHS
Infor JouleX

ENTREPRENEURS SPECIALISTS

MOMENTUM

Capabilities This dimension assesses capabilities for: commercial and retail building energy data
capture, IT, data centre and telecoms energy data capture, industrial and
manufacturing plant energy data capture, primary energy and on-site generation data
capture, IT systems integration and manual input, market data capture, master data
management, workflow and task management, security and data audit,
internationalization, utility bill management, energy procurement and risk
management, energy monitoring and targeting, energy asset management, project and
portfolio management, carbon reporting and analysis, and energy reporting and
analysis.

Momentum This dimension assesses strategic success metrics including: market vision and
sustainability, product strategy and architecture, customer momentum,
implementation and value, organizational resources, financial resources,
partnerships.

The Green Quadrant graphic is generated from a multi-criteria model in a spreadsheet. The flexible
design of this model enables Verdantix clients to add providers and re-weight or re-score criteria for
additional insights.

Source: Verdantix




Schneider Electric
Johnson Controls
Elster EnergyICT
CA Technologies

CarbonSystems

GridPoint

Siemens

Verisae
JouleX
Hara

Infor

SAP
IBM

IHS
Commercial and retail
building energy data
capture

IT, data centre and
telecoms energy data
capture

Industrial and
manufacturing plant energy
data capture

Primary energy and on-site
generation data capture

IT systems integration and
manual input

Market data capture

Data architecture and
scalability

Master data management

Workflow and task
management

Security and data audit

Internationalization

This figure represents the quantified assessment of supplier commercial
Measurement scale is capabilities based on the Green Quadrant benchmark data. A full bar indicates
0 to 3 best in class capabilities (3/3), an empty bar indicates no capabilities (0/3).

Source: Verdantix




Schneider Electric
Johnson Controls
Elster EnergyICT
CA Technologies

CarbonSystems

GridPoint

Siemens

Verisae
JouleX
Hara

Infor

SAP
IBM

IHS
Utility bill management

Energy procurement and
risk management

Energy monitoring and
targeting

Energy asset management

Project and portfolio
management

Carbon reporting and
analysis

Energy reporting and
analysis

This figure represents the quantified assessment of supplier commercial
Measurement scale is capabilities based on the Green Quadrant benchmark data. A full bar indicates
0 to 3 best in class capabilities (3/3), an empty bar indicates no capabilities (0/3).

Source: Verdantix

 Energy and industry domain credentials. The CA ecoMeter application, targeted
specifically at data centre and building energy management; and CA ecoDesktop,
targeted specifically at PC power consumption, differentiate CA Technologies from its
peers. IBM increased its capabilities within building energy management through its
acquisition of TRIRIGA in April 2011, inheriting over 200 customers including the City
of New York (see Verdantix IBM Acquires TRIRIGA To Boost Smarter Buildings
Initiative). Schneider Electric increased its expertise and understanding around supply
side energy management with its acquisition of Summit Energy in 2011.

 Established enterprise-scale customer bases. All three suppliers have strong customer
portfolios including a large number of firms with annual revenues greater than $1
billion, with proven deployments covering at least 4,000 sites and 65 countries. In March
2012, IBM’s largest publicly disclosed customer deal, the US Air Force, signed to deploy
the IBM TRIRIGA software across its physical infrastructure portfolio. This spans 626



Figure 14. Momentum Scores For 14 Energy Management Software Suppliers

Schneider Electric
Johnson Controls
Elster EnergyICT
CA Technologies

CarbonSystems

GridPoint

Siemens

Verisae
JouleX
Hara

Infor

SAP
IBM

IHS
Market vision and
sustainability

Product strategy and
architecture

Customer momentum

Implementation and value

Organizational resources

Financial resources

Partnerships

This figure represents the quantified assessment of supplier market momentum
Measurement scale is based on the Green Quadrant benchmark data. A full bar indicates best in class
0 to 3 momentum score (3/3), an empty bar indicates no momentum (0/3).

Source: Verdantix

million square feet of real estate and approximately 30,000 users will be using the
solution by 2015. CA Technologies and Schneider Electric also have examples of very
large deployments, although they cannot name customers because of confidentiality
clauses. The large number of deployments across multiple countries reflects a key
buying criterion for cautious customers representing firms with multi-billion dollar
revenues and international operations.

 Strong momentum through a partner ecosystem. The three leading suppliers have
established a large number of partnerships with systems integrators and consultants to
help deliver global enterprise solutions. CA Technologies has built a partner ecosystem
comprised of consulting firms such as ICF International and Jones Lang LaSalle, systems
integrators such as Capgemini, Deloitte and Wipro EcoEnergy, and technology partners
such as Cisco and Trendpoint. IBM orchestrated the Green Sigma coalition in 2009 with
ABB, Cisco, Eaton, ESS, Honeywell, Johnson Controls, SAP, Schneider Electric and



Siemens making up its founding members. The Green Sigma enables an industry-wide
interoperability of metering, monitoring, data communications and software within
multiple energy domains. JouleX and Schneider Electric provided the most extensive list of
partners including consulting, systems integrators and technology firms achieving best-in-
class scores (3.0) for the size and quality of their partner network.

 Compelling market vision. Among all participants in this study, IBM and Schneider
Electric articulated the most grounded and detailed vision for market evolution. Schneider
Electric believes its customers will need integrated energy management technology
architecture that enables domain-to-enterprise level visibility, access, control, optimization
and management. IBM’s vision is to help customers leverage increasing volumes of data to
improve future operational, environmental and financial performance. It will do this by
providing increased business intelligence that is driven by advanced analytics and process
automation.

 Comprehensive sustainability strategy. The three leading suppliers have integrated
sustainability deep into their own organizations, leveraging many of their own solutions to
improve energy and environmental performance. By doing so, they lead by example –
reducing their environmental footprint – and provide valuable proof points for potential
customers about how their solutions can improve energy performance.

 Superior organizational and financial resources. In 2011, CA Technologies, IBM and
Schneider Electric generated revenues of $4.8 billion, $106.9 billion and €22.4 billion ($29.3
billion) respectively. Global presence and large workforces are attractive to customers with
international operations of their own. Healthy profits and balance sheets provide assurance
that the supplier will not cease in the middle of a multi-year contract. Significant financial
backing also allows suppliers to invest in long-term product strategies and make strategic
product acquisitions.

Five Suppliers Emerge As Serious Market Contenders
Another five suppliers – CarbonSystems, Elster EnergyICT, Johnson Controls, Siemens and
Verisae – have scored above 1.45 on the capabilities’ axis. Each of these suppliers has strong
capabilities based around original core areas of expertise such as metering, environmental data
management, building controls and maintenance management. Each supplier has invested in
specialist areas to increase its capabilities and value proposition. Specifically:

 CarbonSystems combines metering expertise with new executive dashboards. Specialist
energy management software provider CarbonSystems has reinforced its position in the
Leaders’ Quadrant for the second year running. The CarbonSystems platform has been
developed to capture, integrate and manage energy, emissions and environmental data
across a portfolio of buildings, data centres and manufacturing plants. CarbonSystems
scored highest amongst its peers for energy reporting and analysis (2.5) with best-in-class
scores for voluntary reporting and the quality of its dashboards. CarbonSystems achieved
strong scores for carbon reporting and analysis (2.4), security and data audit (2.3), utility bill
management (2.2) and several best-in-class grades in energy monitoring and targeting.
After successfully revamping its dashboards during 2012, CarbonSystems is building new
analysis and modelling tools in 2013, to enhance the business intelligence of its solution.



 CarbonSystems has developed a strong customer and partner portfolio. CarbonSystems
displays the strongest momentum out of the five suppliers, boasting an impressive global
customer list that includes 34 multi-billion dollar revenue firms including chemical
manufacturer AkzoNobel and Microsoft. CarbonSystems also has diverse partnerships in
place with consultants including Accenture, ICF International and Infosys, facilities
management firms including Colliers International, and a number of geographic-specific
energy consultants such as Fellon-McCord in the US, EnergyQuote JHA in the UK and
Energenz in Hong Kong.

 Siemens complements its energy services offering with its EMC application. Siemens is a
global technology, energy, electronics and electrical engineering firm with 2011 revenues of
$94 billion. In January 2012 Siemens Building Technologies Division acquired energy
procurement services firm Pace Global Energy Services (Pace Global’s ECM Hub was
assessed in the 2011 study). Siemens scored lower on momentum than its peers due to the
fact it does not retail its EMC application as a stand-alone product, instead packaging it
within Siemens Building Technology’s broader energy services capabilities. Siemens
achieved best-in-class scores for corporate sustainability strategy and reporting, energy
management services and organizational resources.

 Siemens has acquired strong supply side management capabilities. Matched only by
Schneider Electric, Siemens scored best-in-class (3.0) for energy procurement and risk
management because of the application’s ability to manage RFP processes, inclusion of
forward-looking energy price and policy data in analysis and best-in-class scenario
modelling capabilities. Siemens scored higher than its peers for utility bill management (2.5)
because of the Energy Monitoring and Control (EMC) application’s best-in-class scores for
supplier management, bill accruals, utility bill validation and energy rebate validation that
leverages its independently populated rebate database. Assuming full product integration
of Pace ECM, Siemens will be in a strong position by mid-2013 to deliver EMC as a stand
alone product and challenge its competitors in the Leaders’ Quadrant.

 Verisae targets the connected facility. In the Leaders’ Quadrant for the second year
running, Verisae has built its energy and industry domain expertise in big box retail, food
service and grocery retail by offering granular solutions for industry-specific operational
assets. Verisae boasts a blue-chip client list including Costco, Sainsbury’s, Target, Tesco and
Walmart. Verisae’s product strategy assumes retail customers – who face the challenge of
collecting data from thousands of stores and managing related environmental issues such
as fugitive F-Gas emissions – will want to combine asset, facility, energy and environmental
management into one integrated platform (see Verdantix Verisae Unlocks Opportunities In
The Retail Market).

 Verisae is ahead of its peers for commercial and retail building energy data capture.
Verisae scored highest amongst its peers for commercial and retail building energy data
capture (2.6) because of best-in-class levels of integration with BMS, HVACs and
refrigeration units, and energy asset management (2.3) because of best-in-class functionality
to automatically identify anomalies in the data, such as refrigerant leaks, and initiate alerts
with asset-level control. Verisae also achieved high scores in master data management (2.1)
and data architecture and scalability (2.0).



 Johnson Controls creates a building energy management apps marketplace. Johnson
Controls’ Panoptix has achieved high scores for commercial and retail building energy data
capture (2.4), energy reporting and analysis (2.1) with best-in-class scores for configurable
internal reporting and the quality of its business rules engine. Johnson Controls’ Panoptix is
an open platform that allows other software suppliers to create apps that leverage the data
within Panoptix, and then sell these apps to Johnson Controls’ customers through the
Panoptix App Marketplace (see Verdantix Panoptix Targets Building Energy Performance
Optimization). To gain a foothold into the Leaders’ Quadrant, Johnson Controls needs to
maintain its investment in the Panoptix product architecture and development of a product
roadmap that allows its customers to leverage, but not rely on these third-party apps.

 Johnson Controls provides strong in-house consulting and implementation services. As
an energy equipment and services firm, Johnson Controls views energy management
software as a source of data-driven insight to trigger actions — either by automated
controls or by technicians. Whilst not given significant weighting in the Green Quadrant
model, strong in-house consulting and implementation services – where Johnson Controls
achieved best-in-class grades in the implementation and value momentum scoring – can
strengthen the solution delivery value proposition.

 Elster EnergyICT leverages its meter data management background. Founded in 1991 and
acquired by global metering firm Elster Group in October 2009, Elster EnergyICT provides
software, services and metering to utilities, energy services firms and C&I firms. Elster
EnergyICT’s vision is to provide customers with actionable intelligence around energy
management driven by data and advanced analytics through its EIServer platform. Elster
EnergyICT scored highest amongst its peers for primary energy and on-site energy
generation data capture (2.4) along with high scores in energy monitoring and targeting
(2.1), data architecture and scalability (2.0) and master data management (2.0). Elster
EnergyICT’s forecasting and project tracking modules achieved best-in-class scores for
target setting and tracking and trend analysis and forecasting. During 2013, Elster
EnergyICT will focus on improving its business intelligence integration tools and
compatibility with mobile devices.

 Elster EnergyICT increases its customer portfolio through energy services partnerships.
Elster EnergyICT has a strong presence in the grocery retail market managing energy for
firms such as Coles and Tesco and in total boasts a customer list that includes over 20 firms
with revenues over $1 billion. Elster EnergyICT has recognized that an increasing number
of energy services firms are starting to look to technology suppliers to help them rapidly
build new and differentiating services and has already partnered with Matrix in the UK and
SEDAC Energy Management in Australia. Elster EnergyICT has further partnerships in
place with a number of systems integrators including Accenture, Atos, Capgemini and
Logica.

Six Suppliers Offer Targeted Energy Domain Expertise
The lower half of the quadrant is populated by six suppliers: GridPoint, Hara, IHS, Infor, JouleX
and SAP. All these suppliers offer solutions targeted at particular industry sectors and energy
domains. Verdantix has identified that:

 Hara provides a data-centric approach to energy and resource management. Despite two


Verdantix green quadrant_energy_management_software_2013

Verdantix green quadrant_energy_management_software_2013

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (7)

Semelhante a Verdantix green quadrant_energy_management_software_2013

Semelhante a Verdantix green quadrant_energy_management_software_2013 (20)

Mais de Steve Cole

Mais de Steve Cole (16)

Último

Último (20)

Verdantix green quadrant_energy_management_software_2013