Enterprise User Experience Hampered by IT Complexity and Mobile Access

New study uncovers that complexity, mobile access and overall poor user experience are the three key factors inhibiting modernisation efforts within large U.S. enterprises.

In its survey of more than 1,200 enterprise application users and 300 IT decision makers from across the U.S., Capriza uncovered that nearly half of the end users polled (45 per cent) were unlikely to use enterprise software due to complicated, poorly designed interfaces.

IT managers concurred, with six in 10 admitting that their current applications were too complex. More telling, however, was that 63 per cent of decision makers conceded that they did not have a plan in place to combat this.

Yuval Scarlat, CEO and co-founder of Capriza, went as far as to say that "complexity is killing enterprise productivity".

He explained: "Employees have more responsibility than ever, yet the legacy applications that they rely on aren’t built with them in mind and are making their lives at work more difficult. Unfortunately when it comes to removing this complexity, IT leaders have a number of huge challenges, namely cost, risk and lack of genuine options."

The survey also found that enterprises are facing significant challenges when it comes to mobility, which despite being a priority for many IT leaders, still fails to deliver for most employees.

Only 38 per cent of those polled considered their company to be ‘mobile friendly’, while six in 10 felt that enterprise apps took too long to complete a task.

A major reason cited by respondents for the pervasive complexity is the cost associated with replacing traditional enterprise solutions. In a recent analysis from Oracle, the company found that a typical 1,500-licence system overhaul could range between $14 to $20 million, with even incremental updates costing millions of dollars.

And in its survey of enterprise IT leaders, Capriza found that nearly seven in 10 (67 per cent) reported having the same or lower budgets than 2014, making the ‘rip and replace’ option unpalatable for most companies.