FY18 global review - Amazon S3 · § To gain feedback on partners’ views of key aspects ... §...

FY18 global review

Norman BuckberryGlobal Program Development Manager Engage

© 2016 Autodesk | 2

§ The year (to December) in numbers

§ The Global Survey

§ Partner Satisfaction Survey

Agenda


§ Recruitment of students (new MAU)§ 37380 from 52231 reported

§ Retention MAU§ 3-5k monthly

§ Fusion 360 ACU§ 4726 exams taken – 3531 passed

Fusion 360 adoption


§ Activities (classes, Designathons, Open Doors etc)§ 4185 activities reported§ 94,333 participants

§ Teaching events§ 52,246 students emails captured

§ 17028 on full classes§ 13136 on Designathons§ 6795 on CAD+Fusion classes

Fusion 360 activities


§ New sites – Fusion 360§ 329 sites offering Fusion 360 training (inc 97 AAPs)

§ New Sites - BIM§ 328 new AEC partners (inc 81 AAPs)

Partner Engagement


§ Significant spend§ $260k+ spent on 146 events for Focus Accounts§ From a total reported spend of approx. $890K

§ 128 Focus Accounts identified as “reached”

§ 5321 Students reached

Focus Accounts


§ Very high impact§ Some very large numbers

§ Territory dependent results§ Some regions have driven the goals successfully

§ High visibility§ Statistics§ Stories

Highlights


§ Goal measurement confusion§ Territory dependent results

§ Some regions have clearly struggled with the goals

§ High reporting load§ Statistics§ Stories

§ Focus accounts and ELA

Lessons learned

Autodesk Global Partner Satisfaction Survey FY18global results

Draft 1 – 31 Jan 2018Norman BuckberryGlobal Program Development Manager Engage


§ To gain feedback on partners’ views of key aspects of the service received from the reginal distributors

§ To provide a key metric for the FY18 distributor score card

Purpose of the survey


§ VERY low response rate§ Too soon after global survey??

§ A few partners selected the wrong distributor§ Error?

§ Where we have corresponding scores from the global futures survey, the scores in this survey are generally lower.

Key takeaways


Partner Types & respondents

101, 63%

50, 31%

9, 6%

Partner Type

ATC

ATC/AAP

AAP

160 responses

73, 45%

29, 18%

24, 15%

24, 15%

11, 7%

Respondent role

Site Manager

Instructor

Ops/admin

Other

Project Manager

161 responses


Poor=1

Fair=2

Good=3

VeryGood=4

Excellent=5

Averagescoreisfrom1-5basedon#responsesateachlevel*levelvalue– totaldividedbythenumberofresponses

The scoring model


Distributor Ratings – Global - Overall

43, 28%

45, 29%

41, 27%

18, 12%7, 4%

Overall

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor

154 responses – Average = 3.64

Global futures survey gave a 3.75 average from 496 responses- 0.11 variance


Distributor Ratings – Global – Timeliness of response

45, 29%

54, 35%

33, 21%

15, 10%7, 5%

Timeliness

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor


Global futures survey gave a 3.96 average from 496 responses for General Support- 0.21 variance


Distributor Ratings – Global – Quality of response

51, 33%

45, 29%

34, 22%

20, 13%4, 3%

Quality

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor


Global futures survey gave a 3.96 average from 496 responses (General Support)- 0.22 variance


Distributor Ratings – Global – Communications

36, 23%

57, 37%

38, 25%

16, 10%7, 5%

Communications

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor




Distributor Ratings – Global – Marketing Support

21, 14%

33, 22%

58, 38%

28, 18%

13, 8%

Marketing

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor




Distributor Ratings – Global – Enablement

27, 18%

36, 23%

49, 32%

30, 19%

12, 8%

Enablement

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor




Distributor Ratings – Global – Business Development

22, 14%

35, 23%

51, 33%

29, 19%

17, 11%

Business Development

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor



Distributor Ratings – Global – Escalation to Autodesk

32, 21%

32, 21%

43, 28%

33, 22%

12, 8%

Escalations

Excellent

Very Good

Good

Fair

Poor


Autodesk Global Partner Survey November/December 2017resultsVersion 1 – 1 February 2018Norman BuckberryGlobal Program Development Manager Engage


§ To gain feedback on partners’ views of key aspects of the Autodesk ATC/AAP and associated programs

§ To gain feedback on partners’ views on the future of learning in their markets

§ To create a useful point of view regarding potential development paths for Autodesk education programs and services

§ To inform the distributors and indirectly the partners of the views of the partner community worldwide

Purpose of the survey


Completed count

sites % submisns

Global 668

ANZ 9 28 32%ASEAN 11 101 11%China 11 177 6%Taiwan 23 104 22%HK 4 13 31%Japan 120 178 67%Korea 28 64 44%

Responses summary - globalCompleted count

sites % submisns

MEA 39 160 24%India 90 190 47%NAMER

82 196 42%

LATAM 36 370 10%Europe 177 542 33%Russia 28 84 33%CIS 10 26 38%


Role ResponsesBusiness Owner 196Business Manager 193Autodesk Site Manager 195Autodesk Instructor 247Training Support 155Marketing Support 79Operational Support 123Sales/Other 53

Respondent role (Multiple selections) Q.5


Partner Types

419, 74%

117, 21%

31, 5%

Partner Type (Q.1)

ATC

ATC/AAP

AAP

567 responses

166, 29%

402, 71%

Also VAR? (Q.4)

VAR

not VAR

566 responses


Manypartnersoffering§ AutoCAD§ Inventor§ Revit (Arch/MEP/Structure)§ 3ds Max

Somepartnersoffering§ Navisworks§ Adv Steel§ Civil 3D§ Map 3D§ Maya§ Vault§ AutoCAD Electrical§ AutoCAD Mechanical§ Fusion 360

Products taught (Q.8)Afewpartnersoffering

§ ReCap§ Robot§ Plant / P&ID§ Factory Design§ Dynamo§ NetFabb§ CAM Duct / CAD MEP§ BIM 360§ Infraworks§ Alias§ Simulation§ HSM§ Moldflow§ Alias§ Mudbox§ Stingray


Manypartnersadding“classichero”products§ Inventor§ Revit (Arch/MEP/Structure)§ 3ds Max§ Maya§ Civil 3D

Manypartnersadding§ BIM 360§ “BIM”§ Fusion 360§ Navisworks

Products added FY19 (Q.9)Afewpartnersadding

§ ReCap§ Robot§ Plant / P&ID§ Dynamo§ FormIT§ NetFabb§ CAM Duct / CAD MEP§ BIM 360§ Infraworks / Vehicle Tracking§ Simulation§ HSM§ Nastran§ POWER§ Moldflow§ Fusion Lifecycle§ Vault§ Eagle§ Arnold§ Mudbox§ MotionBuilder§ Stingray§ Print Studio§ Sketchbook


492

146

9363

289

370

244

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

ATC/AAP face to face in Classroom

remote using Skype or other conferencing

Classroom with additional video content

Video eLearning with instructor support

over the shoulder at customer site

Face to face at customer classroom

Face to face at academic classroom

responses

responses

Training delivery types (Q.15)


Global Programs Participation (Q.52)

257, 56%89, 19%

94, 20%

21, 5%

F1 in Schools

Not aware

Not participating

Want to participate

Actively participating

450 responses

268, 58%72, 16%

95, 21%

23, 5%

Worldskills

Not aware

Not participating

Want to participate


455 responses

298, 66%69, 15%

76, 17%

7, 2%

VEX Robotics

Not aware

Not participating

Want to participate


278, 61%78, 17%

86, 19%

13, 3%

First Robotics

Not aware

Not participating

Want to participate


458 responses461 responses


Fusion 360 Channel Participation? (Q.14)

206, 37%

356, 63%

Do you participate in Fusion 360 channel activities? (Q.14)

Yes

No

562 responses


D4I and Student Experts

99, 20%

401, 80%

Do you leverage D4I? (Q.20)

Yes

No

500 responses

95, 19%

405, 81%

Are you engaged with Student Experts and Ambassadors? (Q.21)

Yes

No

500 responses


Do you use an LMS/LCMS?

45, 11%

166, 39%

211, 50%

LMS usage (Q.54)

LMS

Planning to use

no plans

380 responses

ExamplesofLMSinuse

Moodlex6

D2L

CADLearningx2

Globale-Training

Inhouse/customx12

Unspecified20

ILIAS

E-Ducativa

Schoology

AlsoafewreferencestovirtualclassroomslikeWeb-Ex


Howlearningischanginglearning/learners§ For the better!§ Need faster access to increasing amounts of

knowledge§ What you need, when you need it§ More practical knowledge, trial and error etc§ More mentoring and distance learning§ Online/remote training / webinars§ Case based / project based, career oriented§ VR, immersive etc is growing§ Prefer videos§ More intuitive and productive§ Increased use of technology (devices and

sources)§ More productive from younger age, self

motivated§ More adaptive§ Quicker to grasp meaning, smarter§ Innovative / free thinking / inquisitive§ Tech savvy§ Comfortable thinking in the “virtual world”

The new generation of learners (Q.53)Learnersalsoare

§ Less inclined to take traditional courses§ Less interested in theory§ Lacking basic technical knowledge§ Shorter in attention span§ Impatient § Still willing to use classroom as needed§ In need of more practice before taking exams§ Bypassing teachers who do not make adequate

efforts§ Potentially more gullible – believe anything they

find


Manypartnersoffering§ NOTHING!§ No opinion!§ No idea!§ Online learning / video§ Online/remote training / webinars§ Case based / project based§ Blended learning

Somepartnersoffering§ VR§ Social media add on support / remote counselling§ “flipped classroom”§ Connected classroom§ CAD Learning§ Global E-Training

§ Some partners want to know more

Non-traditional methods (Q.59) and in future (Q.60) Partnerswilloffermore

§ Self-paced learning§ Online learning (inc. VR/AR)§ Virtual classroom§ More cloud-based options

Partnersseegrowingadoptionofonline§ Increased participation – more customers§ Online learning§ Mobile classroom§ Better access in rural areas / at home / anywhere§ Relates more easily to younger users§ Helps with ageing addressing workforce§ Continuous engagement / interaction§ Online may be the “only” method in future§ Easier to teach concepts / basic skills§ Increased knowledge retention§ Some countries not ready for online learning§ Increased teamwork/teambuilding§ Questions re business models for partners

§ Some partners want to know more§ Many partners have no opinion§ Many partners still believe in classroom


Future topics offered (Q.11)

72, 15%

411, 85%

Internet of Things (IoT)

Yes

No

454 responses

98, 20%

398, 80%

FoMT

Yes

No

548 responses

62, 14%

392, 86%

Industry 4.0

Yes

No 349, 64%

199, 36%

BIM

Yes

No



Future models awareness

360, 81%

42, 9%34, 8%9, 2%

(micro-)credentialing (Q.55)

Not aware

Want to adopt

Not planning

Already using

446 responses

268, 59%75, 16%

85, 19%29, 6%

New Business models (Q.56)

Not aware

Want to adopt

Not planning

Already using

457 responses

165, 37%

123, 28%

158, 35%

Remote product use (Q.57)

No

No, but want to use it

Yes 305, 67%71, 15%

62, 14%19, 4%

Immersive/Augmented (Q.58)

Not aware

Want to adopt

Not planning

Already using



Government initiatives awareness (Q.50)

244, 53%215, 47%

Commercial retraining

Aware

Not aware

456 responses 460 responses


220, 48%237, 52%

Academic markets

Aware

Not aware

267, 59%189, 41%

Vocational Training markets

Aware

Not aware206, 45%

254, 55%

Qualifications alignment

Aware

Not aware


Government initiatives funding access (Q.51)

148, 32%

310, 68%

Commercial retraining funding

Yes

No

463 responses


111, 24%

351, 76%

Academic markets funding

Yes

No

161, 35%

302, 65%

Vocational Training funding

Yes

No


Distributor Ratings – Global (Q.30)

21, 4%20, 4%112, 23%

150, 30%

195, 39%

General Support

1

2

3

4

5

497 responses – Average = 3.35 494 responses – Average = 3.40

53, 11%58, 12%

152, 31%

132, 26%

102, 20%

Marketing Support

1

2

3

4

5

497 responses – Average = 3.94498 responses – Average =3.96

22, 4%27, 6%111, 22%

137, 28%

200, 40%

Communications

1

2

3

4

5

44, 9%62, 12%

146, 30%

135, 27%

107, 22%

Enablement

1

2

3

4

5

26, 5%34, 7%118, 24%

177, 36%

141, 28%

Overall

1

2

3

4

5



Manypartnershavelittleornoknowledgeorplansaroundfuturemodelsoflearningdelivery

Somepartnershaveadoptedorplantoadoptverycuttingedgedeliverytechniques

Alotofpartnersareinterestedandwanttoknowmore

Thepartnersrecognizethatlearnersarechangingandtheyneedtochange;butsomeclingtotraditionalmodels!

Majorityoftrainingisstillclassroomand“overtheshoulder”.

Some “high level” takeawaysAutoCADisstillBIGbusiness;butmoreproductsarealsofeaturingstrongly

Partnersnotofferingmuchinthe“futuretopics”,exceptforBIM

Partnersnotwidelyengagingwith§ Global programs like VEX, WS etc§ D4I§ Student Expert / Ambassadors

Partnersnotwidelyexploringnationalinitiativesandsourcesoffunding

Distributorratingslowestforenablementandmarketing

Autodesk is a registered trademark of Autodesk, Inc., and/or its subsidiaries and/or affiliates in the USA and/or other countries. All other brand names, product names, or trademarks belong to their respective holders. Autodesk reserves the right to alter product and services offerings, and specifications and pricing at any time without notice, and is not responsible for typographical or graphical errors that may appear in this document.

© 2016 Autodesk. All rights reserved.

FY18 global review - Amazon S3 · § To gain feedback on partners’ views of key aspects ... §...

Documents

Transcript of FY18 global review - Amazon S3 · § To gain feedback on partners’ views of key aspects ... §...