User Group Priorities for Development

1. User Group Priorities for Development

2. Assumptions • ER system still remains in place • Capture individual user input • Repository of good ideas that will continually be evaluated • Expectations set with users that this is a request system, not a tracking system • Regional User Groups • Play a new and significant role in driving and prioritizing enhancements that have a meaningful impact on a large number of Lawson clients • Lawson will commit to and track a consolidated and prioritized list of enhancements • “Big Rocks” • Continue to be driven by Lawson Vertical and Product Strategy

3. Product Enhancement Process • “Big Rocks”driven by • Lawson vertical strategy • Horizontal competitiveness • “Medium Rocks” driven by • Lawson User Groups • Lawson product strategy • Regulatory requirements • “Small Rocks” driven by • single/multiple client enhancement requests • Lawson product strategy

4. Stratification of Roadmap Items • Extend the Value - “Big Rocks” • New Products (example: Time & Expense) • Significant new features driven by corporate/Vertical strategy (example: Position Management) • Major enhancements driven by Lawson Customers (example: Absence Management) • Strengthen the Core - “Small Rocks” • User driven enhancement requests • Focus on one or a small group of users

5. “Medium Rocks” Concept • Follows strategic planning metaphor • Small number • User Groups are key to identifying “Medium Rocks” • “Medium Rocks” are identified and force ranked by product: • Initially by leverage and priority • Followed by product attribute analysis • Lawson reports on progress and status Enhancement Request System “Small Rocks” “Medium Rocks”

6. RUG Development Priorities - Objective Many Leverage Few High Low Priority

7. Development RUGs Development Priorities Product Road Map Extending the value Strengthening the core Strengthening the care Advances in technology Regional User Group Development Priorities

8. Process Guidelines • This is a Regional User Group driven activity • This is an optional activity for Regional User Groups to participate in • The focus is a small number of enhancements that will generate significant value • Not all prioritized requests from every user group will make the final cut • Lawson will provide on-going feedback for those enhancements that are committed to

9. Regional User Group Development Priorities • Completed the Round 1 User Priorities for Development Process • Lawson has committed to updating the Round 1 list on a quarterly basis • Lawson has allocated resources to work with user groups on this process • Identified what worked and what did not in Round 1. • Defined and kicked off Round 2 of the User Priorities for Development Process • Created a survey to capture User Group Priorities for Development • Utilised Digital Concourse as a technology to capture survey data • Lawson continued commitment for the fall user group meetings • Round 2 Survey currently in process

10. Round 2 – Automating the Process • Regional User groups are utilizing Digital Concourse to automate data capture • Users have the option to participate in a survey • All Digital Concourse users were notified and provided a link • Some RUGs sent the link to all members • Non RUG members are not prohibited from taking the survey • Lawson will utilize the data provided by the user groups in the product decision process. • Round 2 survey date ended 12/31/04 • Round 3 survey date ends 04/05

11. The Survey - Select the product areas you want to influence

12. The Survey - Quality ranking questions

13. The Survey - Top 5 Ranking Questions

14. The Survey - Results

15. Detailed Product Reporting

16. Discuss items on Initial List Perform Survey Review Survey Result Feedback to User Groups Feedback of Development progress Feb July Nov CUE Proposed List for Development Comitted List for Development Development Process Initial Starter List FinalStarter List Regional User Group Development Priorities RUG Development Priorities – Round 3 The Process May

17. Regional User Group Development Priorities Round 3 - The “List” • Initial Starter List is created and distributed by Lawson Product Management • Starter List is reviewed by the RUGs • RUG’s can add to the initial starter list • Not all requests from every user group will make the final cut • RUG’s can not remove items from the initial starter list • Development Sub-Group aggregates RUG feedback and finalizes list • List is distributed via survey or other data collection mechanism

18. Defining requirements Final Design Documents Beta Testing Regional User Group Development Priorities Help Lawson understand the requirements Work together with Lawson during design phase Evaluate design documents and QA the design Participate in Beta testing Involvement during Development Process

19. Regional User Group Development Priorities Round 3 – Prioritization and Data Collection • This is a Regional User Group Driven activity • This is an optional activity for Regional User Groups • The focus is a small number of enhancements that will generate significant value • A Digital Concourse survey is one option for data collection – but not required

20. Regional User Group Development Priorities • Round 1 results summary • Releases 8.0x 8.1x 8.1.1 tbd • HR 3 5 1 - • Proc 5 3 1 2 • Fin 10 5 2 15 • Dist - 1 - 2 • Round 2 starter list contents • HR 20 • Fin 87 • Proc 27 • Tech 10 • Voting results being compiled by Development Subgroup