Infor CloudSuite Reviews

This is a production factory, so CloudSuite is used for bookkeeping, warehousing, and financial production.

CloudSuite has been helpful because we are using it in many countries too. If any of the companies have their own solutions, it affects the information flow. If you all have one solution and it's international, then the information flow is real-time.

There's no one feature or process that needs to improve. I couldn't give you an example because all of them are important.  

We started using CloudSuite Industrial, so it's been about 12 or 13 years.

This is cloud-based, so the stability is only affected by the connection.

It's hard to say because the owner of the product is the only one who knows exactly what the scalability is. But based on what I can see from the patches and updates, the scalability has been seamless. In total, there are about 3,000 end-users on the platform.

I have no complaints about Infor support.

Of course, we considered some other solutions. We did some research and chose CloudSuite because it has the flexibility to cover a range of areas. And there were many other factors like traceability, for example, which is crucial for food production.

Installing CloudSuite is incredibly straightforward. At the very beginning, we had help from the solution's Vendor. Deployment took about a week, excluding the preparation phase, which lasted about a month. And the number of people needed to deploy varies from company to company. If you are a big company, the number of people involved will be bigger than in small companies because you have to cover all areas. So there was quite a big group of consultants and also several teams on our side.

Pricing is always an area where there is room for improvement. 

I rate Infor CloudSuite Industrial nine out of 10. If you are working in the food and beverage industry, I would say it's a perfect solution.

We were using Infor WMS for operational management in a product warehouse.  

It was a complete wave management system to increase processing efficiency. For awareness, they were using wave management cycling. That feature was very good.  

Nothing much as comes to my mind as being negative or that needed to be added to the product. It was a pretty good solution for us. It required more time than I had with it to learn it well enough.  

My experience with the CloudSuite WMS (Warehouse Management System) would be about for a year or so. It was on-premises when I was hands-on with it. I was involved with it from a functional perspective and not from a technical perspective.  

The stability was good. There were not many problems that you faced in working with the product.  

The scalability of the product was good. It was pretty easy to scale it and to add more processes into it.  

When it came to choosing CloudSuite, we had several products on our shortlist. For example, there was SAP WM and there was Manhattan WMS — there were pretty much four or five are tools that we were considering. It was more of how solutions fit our given requirements. So it was about costs. It was about functionality. We tried out the available options. CloudSuite came out on top.  

The installation and setup were done by a technical team from within our company. I was not in a place to notice any challenges in setting it up and I heard nothing negative about it.  

The pricing, from my understanding, is something that is not built on a standard model.  

I think that people who are considering CloudSuite should use it because that is the wave of the future. If you are not there using the CloudSuite, you are not keeping up with a lot of your market.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate CloudSuite as about seven-out-of-ten.  

To make it score higher I probably have to get more exposed to what it can do. It is a seven because that is as far as I have been able to discover the inner workings of the product. If I get more hands-on time with it, I may be able to improve on that rating.  

In this case, scheduling and product planning were key drivers of ROI, but the overall step up in technology, user interface, and usability were very valuable.

Visibility across six buildings and 14 process lines were the #1 goal - determining parts completion dates, tracking QA issues, and just finding out where in production we were with a specific part was a full-time job for several people.

• Better planning
• Better visibility
• Streamlined staging
• Raw materials inventory awareness

Two years.

It was difficult, mainly due to the plant floor guys were used to a 12 year-old technology, various whiteboards, and dated approaches to rely on paper travellers, etc.

No.

No, the system was sold to us at the current user level, and was quite adequate to handle our operational load with no problems.

Infor is impossible, but if you have a good reseller partner, they can handle just about any issues.

Very good with the reseller.

It was ancient and didn't have half the features of SyteLine.

The complexity was mostly on having to leave the old ways behind and work how modern software speeds up processes.

Our reseller partner was excellent.

Mainly, we pushed back a $7M plant expansion because we were able to increase throughput with our existing facility. We will still build the new lines eventually, but we're looking back at how we designed it now that our workflow is different.

It was a bit more than our original budget, but once you learn to use it, you can see why it's well worth it.

Epicor, GlobalShop, Plex, NetSuite, and a couple others.

Very pleased with it so far. We will probably get even better with it in the years to come.