How indigenous software companies price their product and service offerings: an exploratory investigation
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of this study is to investigate how indigenous software companies are pricing and licensing their product and service offerings. Nearly a decade ago, almost all software product companies sold software by offering perpetual licences and the software companies performed local installations on their clients’ premises. Today the Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model is having a profound influence on the way software is currently charged and licensed. In place of an upfront payment in the form of a licence fee the cost of the service, upgrades, backups and support are all included in a specific fee (subscription). \n\nThe Ireland-Newfoundland Partnership (INP) fund supported this research project. The research focused on Irish and Newfoundland indigenous software companies and with the help of the INP fund, the researcher collected part of the primary data in Newfoundland, Canada. Conducting the study in two jurisdictions enabled the researcher to identify similarities and differences amongst the indigenous software vendors in the two regions. \n\nMixed-methods surveys are pursued to achieve the research objectives. The primary data used in this study was gathered through a questionnaire administered to 220 indigenous Irish software companies, with a response rate of 29% and a series of six semi-structured interviews. The interviews were conducted with owners and managers in Ireland and Newfoundland. This mixed-method survey enabled the researcher to establish information as regards the industry sector, gain an in-depth understanding of how software companies are pricing and licensing their software offerings and understand exportation of software. \n\nThe findings that emerged from this research show that pricing was dependent on a vendor’s software business model. The outcome of this study shows that there appears to be a mixture of software licensing methods used by software vendors surveyed. Some vendors are using the traditional software licensing methods while others are using contemporary methods such as usage-based methods. A second finding that surfaced from this study relates to the pricing methods used by software vendors surveyed. In general, vendors’ pricing methods are categorised as cost-based, competition-based or customer-based. It emerged that despite the software owners indicating that they use customer-based methods, a cost-based approach dominated both the questionnaire and interview findings. It was also discovered that software vendors were no longer offering pure product or pure services to their customers and that SaaS was increasing in popularity as a pricing model amongst the Irish and Newfoundland software vendors. \n\nThe outcome of this study offers a software-pricing template attached as Appendix F, which would help practitioners to learn from their experience and induct staff assuming responsibility in this area.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».