LawsonGuru.com Forums
- PO25.6_Is there an audit for this form?
- PO25.6_Is there an audit for this form?
- PO25.6_Is there an audit for this form?
- IC234 ITL-SOH
- po10.2 vendor order day
- ACA ALE Member Group - Transmitter Identification Number
- IF10.1 or NX10.1 Lookup Table Update
- Links in Manager Self Service
- Multiple PO25 agreements for an item
- ADP W2 and Lawson Payroll
LawsonGuru Blog 
Likely to be the truth, but also likely to be exagerated. Perhaps St. Paul was overloaded with R&D costs and the offshore moves represent a shift towards balancing the global enterprise. One thing is clear, executives at the Fortune 1000 level need to see a committment to cost stablization from its vendors, and the consensus is that offshoring initiatives are the best way to do that. We saw this play out for manufacturing and supply chain industries in the 80’s, and now it’s happening in the IT sector. So the proof is in the pudding so to speak. Lawson will need to keep its licensing and fees competative. They will need to offer new applications and functionality. And finally they will need to penetrate new markets. I hear Lawson is starting to do more and more business in India. I can also see the M3/S3 convergence here in America.
The LawsonGuru Letter made a very good point by saying clients may not perceive any value from switching to Landmark. I think there is a lot of risk in launching Landmark now. It’s just too much for the company to handle. If I had to make a prediction, some point in the future, Lawson will supply Landmark to its new clients who will never have known the old COBOL product. Then, any and all new functionality will be developed in Landmark code and never retrofitted to COBOL. So if our old clients want to progress, they will need to convert over (eventually).