Share your experience using Workiva Wdesk

The cross-functionality between connectivity, whether through API connections between different software platforms or the connection of data collection to the actual written ESG report, is highly valuable. The connectivity of all these aspects significantly aids in data assurance, which I consider a bonus.

The tool's script encoding needs to be updated to make it more user-friendly and less of a manual process when changes are made to a company's program. Those changes happen frequently due to mandatory or voluntary reporting requirements, leading to lost linkage connections that must be manually reset each time a change is made. This aspect is not functional now, and I see it as an opportunity for improvement.

I have been using the product for a year. 

The tool is scalable and competitive compared to other products in the market. 

Workiva Wdesk's support is proactive about closing the gaps in the platform. 

Positive

I am unsure why Workiva Wdesk lacks certain functionalities that other software has. However, they are working to update and match the capabilities of similar software. Although they are not yet on par with other software's capabilities, they are making progress. They also offer some unique benefits that other software does not have. It appears to be a work in progress, with a different prioritization roadmap than other software companies. Their current focus is more on connectivity to other applications and software than script functionalities.

The tool's deployment is quick. Once the program is set up, you're ready to collect data and connect it to your report. The deployment team's size depends on the size of the company and how many different data providers you're utilizing. Some companies have one person doing everything, while others have a huge team. We're on the latter end of it, with many people involved. One great thing about the platform is that everything is consolidated in one place, providing a single resource for everyone. This is a benefit.

The  maintenance of the solution depends on the experience of the person managing the company's program. The company might have a contractor handling the back end and software management if they're low-level and only analyzing the data. However, if you have someone experienced with software and script encoding, that person might be the analyst and managing the program. Generally, most people are just analysts and not managing the software. There's an opportunity for improvement in user management of their software, and I hope they address this gap before the year ends.

Most companies have a contractor to deploy the solution. 

The tool's ROI depends on the company. This product can streamline the process for many companies, but it depends on the number of data providers. There are opportunities for improvement in how data providers supply data, which likely needs fixing on the coding end. The broader the data collection, the more opportunities there are for streamlining the product to make it more user-friendly and less of a manual process.

I've been working with the tool's script encoding departments and top management to address gaps in their script encoding. They are working towards closing these gaps to ensure we can continue using the product. However, if these gaps are not closed, we will discontinue its use. We need the product to be more functional quarterly and annually. Any amendments made to our program are not user-friendly now; it's a manual process.

I rate the overall product a seven out of ten. Despite the areas for improvement, actively working on enhancements. Their customer service compensates for the current limitations.

The solution is used for financial reporting.

The collaboration within the platform is valuable.

The solution should be able to do pivot tables.

I have been using the solution for three years. I am using the latest version of the solution.

I rate the tool’s stability a six out of ten. The speed must be improved. We're using the data center in the US. It might improve if we use the one in Japan.

I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. Five of our customers are using the product. Our customers are very large multi-national companies.

I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten. The initial setup was straightforward. The solution is cloud-based. We deployed the product along with Wdata in six months. It was for a lot of use cases. To deploy the tool, we designed the use cases and developed them. Then, we went through unit tests, integration tests, and user acceptance tests. It was an Agile delivery cycle.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten. Our clients in Asia think that the solution is too expensive. The tool is difficult to sell. Other than the implementation service, the customer needs to pay the annual license fee.

We use Wdata more than Wdesk. Someone who is considering using the product must also use Wdata. They must use it widely for multiple use cases to get the benefit. The product will look too expensive if the customer uses it for a single use case. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.