February 2022
Microsoft Surface devices are reliable, user-friendly, and secure, and they empower efficiencies inside and outside of classrooms. The Surface device family provides much needed flexibility during times of increased hybrid learning and it empowers IT departments to work more efficiently while enabling faculty members to drive deeper connections with their students.
Deciding which devices to support and offer to staff members is a critical choice that every higher-education institution must make. This choice influences not only the success of faculty members but also the success of students. And as the education landscape has transformed due to the need for hybrid learning, making this decision has become even more important. Institutions must provide their staff members with devices that are reliable, secure, and easy to use in any environment.
Microsoft commissioned Forrester Consulting to conduct a Total Economic Impact™ (TEI) study and examine the potential return on investment (ROI) higher-education institutions may realize by deploying Surface devices.1 The purpose of this study is to provide readers with a framework to evaluate the potential financial impact Surface devices have on their organizations.
To better understand the benefits, costs, and risks associated with this investment, Forrester interviewed four decision-makers and surveyed 212 decision-makers with experience using the Surface device family. For the purposes of this study, Forrester aggregated the experiences of the interviewed and surveyed decision-makers and combined the results into a single composite organization.
Prior to using Surface, interviewees’ organizations relied on multiple device vendors, which created inconsistent user experiences. The devices frequently needed repairs and did not provide the level of security IT teams desired.
After investing in the Surface device family, interviewees’ organizations were able to retire their legacy devices, reduce spending for IT support, and provide more efficient user experiences for all device users.
Quantified benefits. Risk-adjusted present value (PV) quantified benefits include:
Interviewees said Microsoft’s extensive warranty policy was a large driver for adopting Surface devices. They said warranties reduce the overall repair costs for a given device by 25% and that they allowed their organizations to easily replace devices. This eliminated the time needed to repair devices in-house.
Interviewees said that prior to investing in Surface devices, it was common for faculty members to use multiple devices from various manufacturers to complete their duties. They also said the need for multiple devices bloated technology budgets and created security concerns. But interviewees said Surface devices are ideal for teaching and conducting research, which eliminated the need to use multiple devices.
Microsoft Surface devices come with increased integration of Microsoft’s broader product suite. Interviewees said having this integration reduced the downtime their organizations experienced during device setup and installation of operating system updates. By using Microsoft Intune, a cloud-based service for mobile device management and mobile application management, interviewees’ organizations were able to consolidate steps during the update process. This reduced downtime for users and manual effort for IT administrators.
Interviewees said Surface improved reliability and that increased interconnectivity with the Microsoft ecosystem reduced the downtime faculty members experience while teaching and conducting research. Interviewees also said Surface devices helped improve employee experiences for faculty and learning experiences for students.
Interviewees said administrators using Surface saw similar time savings as faculty members did. They said Surface improved uptime and reliability and saved each administrator an estimated 13 hours per year.
Unquantified benefits. Benefits that are not quantified for this study include:
Interviewees said Surface devices offer myriad interactive capabilities through their integrations with Microsoft’s software suite and accessories that make hybrid learning more dynamic. They also said having capabilities like live interaction and streaming through Microsoft Teams drove engagement for students in hybrid settings.
Microsoft integrates many fundamental security features into Surface devices by default. They said native data encryption and the ability to use biometric authentication helps IT administrators ensure devices are secure.
Costs. Risk-adjusted PV costs include:
The composite organization initially rolls out 1,000 Surface devices to faculty members and nonfaculty administrators. It rolls out an additional 200 devices in Year 1 and another 300 devices in Year 2. Forrester estimates that accessories like Surface Pens, detachable keyboards, and mice are included in the composite’s rollout and account for 10% of the cost of the devices. Each Surface device comes with a four-year warranty.
During an initial pilot program, the composite requires four FTEs to set up devices during a four-month span. Although Microsoft Autopilot and Intune automate much of the composite’s software installation, the organization dedicates two FTEs working two months on asset tags and device ruggedization during its initial rollout and for other device onboarding tasks in years 1 and 2.
Interviewees said that although using Surface simplified their organizations’ device management requirements, IT administrators still spent time physically managing devices. The composite dedicated 25% of the time of four FTEs to managing devices, and the organization invests an additional $2 per device in Intune to expedite device deployments and software updates.
The financial analysis which is based on the decision-maker interviews and survey found that a composite organization experiences benefits of $5.8 million over three years versus costs of $2.1 million, adding up to a net present value (NPV) of $3.7 million and an ROI of 177%.
The objective of the framework is to identify the cost, benefit, flexibility, and risk factors that affect the investment decision. Forrester took a multistep approach to evaluate the impact that Microsoft Surface can have on an organization.
Interviewed Microsoft stakeholders and Forrester analysts to gather data relative to the Surface for Higher Education.
Interviewed four decision-makers and surveyed 212 decision-makers at organizations using Surface to obtain data with respect to costs, benefits, and risks.
Designed a composite organization based on characteristics of the interviewed and surveyed decision-makers.
Constructed a financial model representative of the interviews and survey using the TEI methodology and risk-adjusted the financial model based on issues and concerns of the decision-makers.
Employed four fundamental elements of TEI in modeling the investment impact: benefits, costs, flexibility, and risks. Given the increasing sophistication of ROI analyses related to IT investments, Forrester’s TEI methodology provides a complete picture of the total economic impact of purchase decisions. Please see Appendix A for additional information on the TEI methodology.
Readers should be aware of the following:
This study is commissioned by Microsoft and delivered by Forrester Consulting. It is not meant to be used as a competitive analysis.
Forrester makes no assumptions as to the potential ROI that other organizations will receive. Forrester strongly advises that readers use their own estimates within the framework provided in the study to determine the appropriateness of an investment in the Surface.
Microsoft reviewed and provided feedback to Forrester, but Forrester maintains editorial control over the study and its findings and does not accept changes to the study that contradict Forrester’s findings or obscure the meaning of the study.
Microsoft provided the customer names for the interviews but did not participate in the interviews.
Forrester fielded the double-blind survey using a third-party survey partner.
The interviewees noted how with legacy device OEMs their organizations struggled with common challenges, including:
Interviewees said faculty and staff members often relied on devices from multiple manufacturers to accomplish their daily tasks and that this caused users to navigate the nuances of each device and their individual operating systems. Interviewees said device users often grew frustrated as they attempted to transition work from one device to another because they would need to reformat files or reconfigure certain aspects of their work to perform correctly on each device. This created inefficiencies in workloads and caused users to become more dependent on one device, which limited their ability to adapt to changing working conditions or wasting the investments made in additional devices.
In addition to the challenges of navigating the operating systems of multiple devices, interviewees’ organizations also needed to ensure that multiple security systems were being properly installed and updated on different devices. This left them vulnerable to potential security threats because it was harder to track and catalog security software updates on disparate devices. Interviewees said their organizations needed to use a device with a proven security track record to ensure secure device environments for users.
Interviewees said that as their organizations’ devices aged, the companies often incurred increased costs to maintain them. One interviewee said: “Over the last several years, we have been having battery-swelling issues and a lot of the users didn’t even know that their batteries were swelling. So they would come in for something else [and] their track pack wouldn’t work. They had a safety hazard that they were carrying around or throwing in their car and leaving in the sun, and they didn’t even know they had that safety risk there. We experienced lots of sound-driver issues, and once our legacy provider changed their docking station, we needed to invest in new infrastructure to support that.”
These interviewees turned to Microsoft Surface devices in order to address the challenges that their legacy device manufacturers created.
Based on the interviews and survey, Forrester constructed a TEI framework, a composite company, and an ROI analysis that illustrates the areas financially affected. The composite organization is representative of the survey respondents and four decision-makers that Forrester interviewed and is used to present the aggregate financial analysis in the next section. The composite organization has the following characteristics:
The composite organization is a US-based higher-education institution with more than 20,000 students and 5,000 employees. Prior to investing in Surface devices, the organization relied on multiple vendors to equip their faculty and nonfaculty staff with devices. This typically required investment in multiple devices because it was not uncommon for faculty members to use a combination of a laptop, tablet, and desktop computer. The composite organization has Surface users across all departments and roles.
The composite organization chooses to deploy devices in a “big bang” method. It makes 1,000 Surface devices available to faculty and nonfaculty upon initial deployment, and this number grows to 1,500 devices by Year 3. These employees use Surface Pro and Surface laptops. Additionally, the organization purchases several Surface Hubs to enhance in-classroom learning. After deployment, 500 faculty members and 200 nonfaculty members use Surface devices, and these numbers grow to 1,000 and 500, respectively, by Year 3.
Ref. | Benefit | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Atr | Reduced technical support costs | $297,000 | $297,000 | $297,000 | $891,000 | $738,595 |
Btr | Retired legacy devices | $810,000 | $1,215,000 | $1,620,000 | $3,645,000 | $2,957,626 |
Ctr | Device setup and update efficiencies | $225,000 | $270,000 | $337,500 | $832,500 | $681,255 |
Dtr | Improved faculty productivity | $310,050 | $465,075 | $620,100 | $1,395,225 | $1,132,113 |
Etr | Improved nonfaculty productivity | $58,500 | $102,375 | $146,250 | $307,125 | $247,669 |
Total benefits (risk-adjusted) | $1,700,550 | $2,349,450 | $3,020,850 | $7,070,850 | $5,757,258 |
Interviewed decision-makers said the growing cost of device support was a major driver in their organizations’ Microsoft Surface investments. They said that although all manufacturers offered warranties for their legacy devices, the warranties did not cover many of the technical issues that users faced. This required IT help desks to perform time-intensive and often costly repairs. If the devices were out-of-warranty, the cost increased significantly.
An assistant director of IT for one institution said repairing legacy devices has become increasingly expensive. They said: “Now more than ever, our machines are getting older, and they’re just failing more and more. You’ll see parts broken on these devices because they are plastic, and it’s become more frequent for us to have to repair these aging devices ourselves.” And these repairs proved costly because they required the organization to invest in additional parts and employee time as they attempted to get old devices back working. They said: “Our old devices — even if they’re only three years old — are costing us a lot of time. I have one ticket in our repair queue that had nothing but weird, little problems. So, we are spending hundreds of dollars in support, just trying to fix these weird, little problems. We haven’t had any of those with our Surface line.”
Interviewees said Microsoft provided their organizations with extensive warranties and reliable devices that eliminate many of the costs associated with device repair and support. One interviewee said: “Microsoft has maintained a consistent approach in relation to device reliability. We’ve had very few devices that have required warranty fixes in relation to fail components or failures.”
Several interviewees also said that using Microsoft’s warranty allowed them to replace defective devices with new machines and that improvements offered by the warranty eliminated the need to buy additional components. It also enabled IT help-desk workers to redirect their efforts to other business priorities.
Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
Factors that could lead to this benefit being different than what’s modeled for the composite organization include:
To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $738,600.
Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A1 | Devices repaired monthly | Assumption | 25 | 25 | 25 | ||
A2 | Cost to repair legacy devices | Interviews | $500 | $500 | $500 | ||
A3 | Annual cost to repair legacy devices | A1*A2*12 | $150,000 | $150,000 | $150,000 | ||
A4 | Average time spent repairing legacy devices (hours) | Interviews | 12 | 12 | 12 | ||
A5 | Hourly cost of employees performing and managing device repair | Assumption | $50 | $50 | $50 | ||
A6 | Employee time spent performing and managing device repairs | A4*A5*A1*12 | $180,000 | $180,000 | $180,000 | ||
At | Reduced technical support costs | A3+A6 | $330,000 | $330,000 | $330,000 | ||
Risk adjustment | ↓10% | ||||||
Atr | Reduced technical support costs (risk-adjusted) | $297,000 | $297,000 | $297,000 | |||
Three-year total: $891,000 | Three-year present value: $738,595 | ||||||
|
Interviewees said the capabilities of Surface devices enabled their institutions to reduce the number of devices that faculty members needed to complete their duties. Prior to investing in Surface devices, it was not uncommon for faculty members to have as many as three university-issued devices (e.g., laptop, tablet, desktop computer). This exacerbated issues with device management, growing technology budgets, and security concerns.
Interviewees said the portability of the Surface products and the touchscreen capabilities of devices like Surface Pro enabled faculty members to use one device to do significantly more things. Surface devices often replaced a tablet and a laptop because they provided users with a portable, high-performance device with a touchscreen which made it easy to use in traditional lecture settings. As these institutions transitioned to hybrid-learning environments, Surface devices became increasingly important, and many Surface users transitioned away from using desktop devices because the need to have all their files accessible from anywhere become a priority.
Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
Factors that could lead to this benefit being different than what’s modeled for the composite organization include:
To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of $3 million.
Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
B1 | Number of faculty members | Assumption | 500 | 750 | 1,000 | ||
B2 | Number of devices retired per faculty member (annually) | Interviews | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||
B3 | Average cost per device retired | Interviews | $1,200 | $1,200 | $1,200 | ||
B4 | Device costs recaptured | Interviews | 75% | 75% | 75% | ||
Bt | Retired legacy devices | B1*B2*B3*B4 | $900,000 | $1,350,000 | $1,800,000 | ||
Risk adjustment | ↓10% | ||||||
Btr | Retired legacy devices (risk-adjusted) | $810,000 | $1,215,000 | $1,620,000 | |||
Three-year total: $3,645,000 | Three-year present value: $2,957,626 | ||||||
|
Interviewees said an additional benefit of using Microsoft Surface devices was the ease of configuring new devices and performing software updates.
They said configuring their organizations’ Surface devices was quick and efficient and that integration between the devices and the Microsoft product suite reduced the downtime experienced during device setup. And this allowed for more seamless device deployments.
An associate director of IT for one interviewed university said: “We use the Microsoft tools to deploy images, MDT (Microsoft Deployment Toolkit), SCCM (system center configuration manager), and things of that nature. So, [regarding the hardware platform], it obviously has a tight integration with all the Microsoft tools. Driver packs, firmware updates, and things like that are very seamless to install using [Microsoft’s] toolset as opposed to having to go to other manufacturers, download specific driver packs, and go through a series of different processes just to get the machine out the door.”
Interviewees said this benefit was particularly helpful in hybrid-working environments because IT staff often had to deploy new devices to remote users. With the help of Intune, IT departments could reliably set up new users on devices regardless of where they were. Interviewees said this was a major time saver and a significant benefit of using Surface devices.
In addition, interviewees also said that performing operating-system updates on Microsoft devices was also easier. One interviewee said: “Because we use Intune, our updates are very simple. With the Surface product line, [we’re] going to receive firmware updates through the Intune management platform. With our legacy devices, [we’re] not. With those machines, [we] needed to run a separate tool to do the firmware updates, so it’s kind of an upside of the agreement of Intune. In terms of driver updates and things like that, our legacy devices are a bit more finicky about the drivers used, which added increased complexity to our update processes.”
Interviewees said that using Intune allowed their organizations to consolidate the steps needed to update their devices, which created faster processes and reduced both downtime for users and manual effort for IT departments.
Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
Factors that could lead to this benefit being different than what’s modeled for the composite organization include:
To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of $681,300.
Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | Number of surface devices | Assumption | 1,000 | 1,200 | 1,500 | ||
C2 | IT effort to deploy legacy devices (hours) | Interviews | 4 | 4 | 4 | ||
C3 | Fully burdened IT administrator salary | Assumption | $50 | $50 | $50 | ||
C4 | Cost to deploy legacy devices | C1*C2*C3 | $200,000 | $240,000 | $300,000 | ||
C5 | Reduction in time spent deploying surface devices | Interviews | 75% | 75% | 75% | ||
C6 | IT effort to update legacy devices (hours) | Interviews | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||
C7 | Device upgrades annually | Interviews | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||
C8 | Cost to upgrade legacy devices | C1*C6*C7*C3 | $200,000 | $240,000 | $300,000 | ||
C9 | Reduction in time spent upgrading & surface devices | Assumption | 50% | 50% | 50% | ||
Ct | Device setup and update efficiencies | (C4*C5)+(C8*C8) | $250,000 | $300,000 | $375,000 | ||
Risk adjustment | ↓10% | ||||||
Ctr | Device setup and update efficiencies (risk-adjusted) | $225,000 | $270,000 | $337,500 | |||
Three-year total: $832,500 | Three-year present value: $681,255 | ||||||
|
Interviewees said faculty members benefit from Surface devices in terms of time savings, greater job satisfaction, and an improved ability to teach in hybrid-learning environments.
One interviewee said: “One of the biggest areas we’ve seen benefits in is our hybrid-learning model. The professors always thought: ‘This is hard. I don’t like this. I want to be in the classroom.’ [But] when we deployed our Surface devices, they realized [they] can draw on them, use the camera for online learning, and mark up Surface laptops in real time. So, they’re the only ones that could interact with their content at that point. Anyone who had just used them as desktop or a laptop couldn’t do that. So, it did help those professors who were using the Surface Pros; they had more interaction within their hybrid classrooms. And I think that did help them. They were able to teach just as they were doing in the classroom [by] marking their slides up and creating a more enjoyable interactive environment.”
Interviewees said increased interaction with content improves teaching experience for staff and students alike and that the reliability of Surface devices enhanced this. Prior to using the Surface product line, it was not uncommon for faculty members to encounter issues with finding, sharing, or presenting content. This caused costly delays both inside and outside of learning environments. Interviewees’ organizations found that their Surface devices did not experience these issues as often, which led to less downtime for faculty users.
Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
Factors that could lead to this benefit being different than what’s modeled for the composite organization include:
To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of $1.1 million.
Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
D1 | Total number of faculty | Assumption | 500 | 750 | 1,000 | ||
D2 | Annual time savings for faculty Surface users (weekly) | Interviews | 26 | 26 | 26 | ||
D3 | Average hourly salary for faculty members | Assumption | $53 | $53 | $53 | ||
D4 | Productivity recapture | Assumption | 50% | 50% | 50% | ||
Dt | Improved faculty productivity | D1*D2*D3*D4 | $344,500 | $516,750 | $689,000 | ||
Risk adjustment | ↓10% | ||||||
Dtr | Improved faculty productivity (risk-adjusted) | $310,050 | $465,075 | $620,100 | |||
Three-year total: $1,395,225 | Three-year present value: $1,132,113 | ||||||
|
Interviewees said nonfaculty members saved time because of better device performance and uptime.
This section explains how the modeling is done.
Factors that could lead to this benefit being different than what’s modeled for the composite organization include:
To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this benefit downward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of $247,700.
Ref. | Metric | Source | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E1 | Total number of non faculty Surface users | Assumption | 200 | 350 | 500 | ||
E2 | Annual time savings for non faculty Surface users (weekly) | Interviews | 13 | 13 | 13 | ||
E3 | Average hourly salary for non facility members | Assumption | $50 | $50 | $50 | ||
E4 | Productivity recapture | Assumption | 50% | 50% | 50% | ||
Et | Improved nonfaculty productivity | E1*E2*E3*E4 | $65,000 | $113,750 | $162,500 | ||
Risk adjustment | ↓10% | ||||||
Etr | Improved nonfaculty productivity (risk-adjusted) | $58,500 | $102,375 | $146,250 | |||
Three-year total: $307,125 | Three-year present value: $247,669 | ||||||
|
Additional benefits that customers experienced but were not able to quantify include:
Interviewees said the interactive capabilities of Surface devices allowed for improved learning opportunities for students in hybrid-learning models. Interviewees are concerned that students are fatigued by the monotony of online classes. This disengages students and frustrates teachers who were looking for creative ways to connect their content with their students.
After deploying Surface devices to teaching staff members, the interviewees’ organizations were able to interact with their content live and project it to students via Microsoft Teams. This was an important way to enhance hybrid learning. Interviewees said by using the many accessories Microsoft provides, teachers can annotate content in real time, which leads to more interactive online classes generating more student engagement.
As previously mentioned, interviewees said security was a strategic driver for investing in Microsoft Surface products and that the Surface line is equipped with many inherent features that promote secure devices. They said integrated encryption secures data to biometrics controls, which restricts unauthorized access. They also said Surface devices provided security to their device environments.
One interviewee said: “With Surface, we now have biometrics included in our security process ... whether it’s touch, fingerprint on the Surface Pros, or camera scanning for the Surface laptops or Surface Pros. Whereas before, we didn’t [have biometrics included]. This goes a long way to helping put our minds at ease that these devices are secure.”
The value of flexibility is unique to each customer. There are multiple scenarios in which a customer might implement Surface devices for higher education and later realize additional uses and business opportunities, including:
Flexibility would also be quantified when evaluated as part of a specific project (described in more detail in Appendix A).
Ref. | Cost | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ftr | Surface device costs | $981,750 | $196,350 | $294,525 | $0 | $1,472,625 | $1,403,659 |
Gtr | Surface device setup and deployment | $262,959 | $21,160 | $29,440 | $0 | $313,559 | $306,526 |
Htr | Device management | $0 | $141,900 | $147,180 | $155,100 | $444,180 | $367,165 |
Total costs (risk-adjusted) | $1,244,709 | $359,410 | $471,145 | $155,100 | $2,230,364 | $2,077,350 |
Interviewees and survey respondents said their organizations provided devices to faculty and nonfaculty staff members. In addition to deploying Surface Pro and Surface laptops, several organizations also chose to deploy Surface Hubs in classrooms.
Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
Factors that could lead to this cost being different than what’s modeled for the composite organization include:
To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 5%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV (discounted at 10%) of $1.4 million.
Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | Number of faculty and non faculty Surface devices | Assumption | 1,000 | 200 | 300 | ||
F2 | Cost per staff Surface device with four year warranty | Assumption | $850 | $850 | $850 | ||
F3 | Cost of Surface devices | F1*F2 | $850,000 | $170,000 | $255,000 | ||
F4 | Cost of Surface accessories | Assumption | $85,000 | $17,000 | $25,500 | ||
Ft | Surface device costs | F1+F2 | $935,000 | $187,000 | $280,500 | $0 | |
Risk adjustment | ↑5% | ||||||
Ftr | Surface device costs (risk-adjusted) | $981,750 | $196,350 | $294,525 | $0 | ||
Three-year total: $1,472,625 | Three-year present value: $1,403,659 | ||||||
|
Interviewees said setting up and deploying Surface devices was simple and required minimal effort to prepare for use. Some of their organizations used Intune and Autopilot to automate the process, but the devices still needed to have asset tags and ruggedized cases applied.
Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
Factors that could result in this cost being different than what’s modeled for the composite organization include:
To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 15%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of $307,000.
Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
G1 | Pilot program duration (months) | Interviews | 4 | ||||
G2 | Number of FTEs involved in setup | Assumptions | 4 | ||||
G3 | Monthly fully burdened costs | Assumption | $8,333 | ||||
G4 | Monthly fully burdened costs | G1*G2*G3 | $133,328 | ||||
G5 | Number of devices | Assumption | 1,000 | 200 | 300 | ||
G6 | Deployment contract | Assumption | $62 | $62 | $62 | ||
G7 | Deployment internal labor costs | Assumption | $33,332 | $6,000 | $7,000 | ||
Gt | Surface device setup and deployment | G1*G2*G3 | $228,660 | $18,400 | $25,600 | $0 | |
Risk adjustment | ↑15% | ||||||
Gtr | Surface device setup and deployment (risk-adjusted) | $262,959 | $21,160 | $29,440 | $0 | ||
Three-year total: $313,559 | Three-year present value: $306,526 | ||||||
|
This cost represents the level of effort required to manage the day to day needs of Surface devices. While there are savings on support cost compared to other device manufacturers, the interviewees indicated that there was some effort expended to manage their Surface device deployments.
In addition to the cost of physical labor to maintain these devices many customers invested in Microsoft Intune to help manage and expedite device deployment and upgrades.
Forrester assumes the following about the composite organization:
Factors that could lead to this cost being different than what’s modeled for the composite organization include:
To account for these risks, Forrester adjusted this cost upward by 10%, yielding a three-year, risk-adjusted total PV of $367,000.
Ref. | Metric | Source | Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | Number of FTEs dedicated to device management | Assumption | 4 | 4 | 4 | ||
H2 | Percent of time spent managing Microsoft devices | Interviews | 25% | 25% | 25% | ||
H3 | Average annual salary for IT employees | Assumption | $105,000 | $105,000 | $105,000 | ||
H4 | Cost of device management | H1*H2*H3 | $105,000 | $105,000 | $105,000 | ||
H5 | Intune costs | Assumption | $24,000 | $28,800 | $36,000 | ||
Ht | Device management | H4+H5 | $0 | $129,000 | $133,800 | $141,000 | |
Risk adjustment | ↑10% | ||||||
Htr | Device management (risk-adjusted) | $0 | $141,900 | $147,180 | $155,100 | ||
Three-year total: $444,180 | Three-year present value: $367,165 | ||||||
|
These risk-adjusted ROI, NPV, and payback period values are determined by applying risk-adjustment factors to the unadjusted results in each Benefit and Cost section.
Initial | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total | Present Value | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total costs | ($1,244,709) | ($359,410) | ($471,145) | ($155,100) | ($2,230,364) | ($2,077,350) |
Total benefits | $0 | $1,700,550 | $2,349,450 | $3,020,850 | $7,070,850 | $5,757,258 |
Net benefits | ($1,244,709) | $1,341,140 | $1,878,305 | $2,865,750 | $4,840,486 | $3,679,908 |
ROI | 117% | |||||
Payback period (months) | 12.0 | |||||
|
The financial results calculated in the Benefits and Costs sections can be used to determine the ROI, NPV, and payback period for the composite organization’s investment. Forrester assumes a yearly discount rate of 10% for this analysis.
Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists vendors in communicating the value proposition of their products and services to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of IT initiatives to both senior management and other key business stakeholders.
Benefits represent the value delivered to the business by the product. The TEI methodology places equal weight on the measure of benefits and the measure of costs, allowing for a full examination of the effect of the technology on the entire organization.
Costs consider all expenses necessary to deliver the proposed value, or benefits, of the product. The cost category within TEI captures incremental costs over the existing environment for ongoing costs associated with the solution.
Flexibility represents the strategic value that can be obtained for some future additional investment building on top of the initial investment already made. Having the ability to capture that benefit has a PV that can be estimated.
Risks measure the uncertainty of benefit and cost estimates given: 1) the likelihood that estimates will meet original projections and 2) the likelihood that estimates will be tracked over time. TEI risk factors are based on “triangular distribution.”
The initial investment column contains costs incurred at “time 0” or at the beginning of Year 1 that are not discounted. All other cash flows are discounted using the discount rate at the end of the year. PV calculations are calculated for each total cost and benefit estimate. NPV calculations in the summary tables are the sum of the initial investment and the discounted cash flows in each year. Sums and present value calculations of the Total Benefits, Total Costs, and Cash Flow tables may not exactly add up, as some rounding may occur.
Interviewee | Region | Number of surface devices | Number of employees | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Head of service delivery | Canada | 800 | 5,500 | ||||
Assistant director of IT | US | 250 | 250 | ||||
Associate director of IT | US | 1,400 | 1,400 | ||||
Executive head of IT | UK | 1,200 | 12,000 | ||||
|
212 decision-makers of educational technology initiatives and users of the Microsoft 365 application suite and Surface devices within schools.
Note: Percentages may not total 100 because of rounding.
Source: “Microsoft Surface Higher Learning,” A commissioned study conducted by Forrester Consulting on behalf of Microsoft, December 2021.
1Total Economic Impact is a methodology developed by Forrester Research that enhances a company’s technology decision-making processes and assists vendors in communicating the value proposition of their products and services to clients. The TEI methodology helps companies demonstrate, justify, and realize the tangible value of IT initiatives to both senior management and other key business stakeholders.