At some point, many organizations face the same question:
Should we replace our current PowerPoint chart add-in with a new solution?
Rising annual license costs and the desire for greater standardization in chart creation are common triggers. In large enterprises, this decision often affects hundreds or even thousands of users, particularly in Finance, Controlling, and strategic project management.
Replacing a chart add-in is not simply a license swap. It affects existing charts, reporting templates, and established workflows. Without careful planning, the organization does not eliminate a problem. It creates a new one.
What is the right way to approach this transition?
When organizations evaluate a new chart add-in, two questions typically dominate:
Both are reasonable starting points. However, they do not go far enough. They focus narrowly on functionality and licensing fees, while overlooking:
A chart add-in is not a standalone product. It is embedded in daily processes and reporting structures.
If features and price are only part of the equation, what should leadership be asking?
Only this broader perspective supports a sound, future-proof decision.
Annual license fees, including projected increases, are easy to quantify. Internal effort is just as significant, including:
A robust business case evaluates licensing costs and internal effort together. Focusing exclusively on licensing fees provides an incomplete financial picture.
A professional transition begins with analysis, not installation. The critical question is not whether the current add-in is used, but how it is used. Key considerations include:
The objective is to develop an accurate view of real-world usage. This insight directly informs the pilot phase, training design, and communication strategy.
A successful transition typically follows four phases.
Identify high-usage departments. Collect representative examples. Systematically review the most common chart types and their configurations based on actual content.
Select users test the new solution using real business scenarios. Evaluation is data-driven and focuses on:
Only after measurable validation should the rollout proceed.
Introduce the new add-in company-wide, supported by:
Teams in Finance and strategic functions are accustomed to working with complex data. When the new solution is clearly positioned and explained, adoption is typically strong.
Following rollout, existing charts are systematically converted using the new software, such as empower® . With mature conversion capabilities and expert support for complex cases, migration is operationally manageable. As legacy charts are converted, the previous add-in is phased out until it is fully decommissioned.
Depending on organizational size and user volume, the transition can typically be completed within three to six months.
At Bayer and Brose, hundreds to thousands of licenses of a legacy chart add-in were in use. Their objective was to provide a standardized, enterprise-wide solution for professional chart creation. Success was driven by:
Both organizations have been working successfully with empower® for years.
Switching a chart add-in is not about feature comparison alone. It requires asking the right strategic questions, evaluating total cost and effort holistically, and executing the transition in a disciplined manner.
If you would like to assess what such a transition could look like in your organization, we would welcome the opportunity to discuss your specific situation. We will outline the approach, required resources, and expected timeline with full transparency.
Is switching a charting add-in only a licensing issue?
No. A switch affects more than costs and contracts. It also impacts existing charts, user workflows, rollout planning, internal communication, and adoption across the organization.
When does it make sense to switch a charting add-in?
A change is often considered when license costs increase, contract renewals are approaching, or the organization wants a more standardized way to create charts.
What questions should companies answer before switching?
Organizations should understand how the current add-in is actually used, which chart types matter most, what internal requirements exist, and how pilot testing, rollout, and migration should be handled.
Why are feature comparisons and license pricing not enough?
They only show part of the picture. Internal effort related to administration, IT support, coordination, and implementation also needs to be considered.
How should companies evaluate the financial impact of switching add-ins?
A solid business case evaluates licensing costs and internal operational effort together rather than focusing only on the price per license.
What does a structured transition to a new charting add-in look like?
In most cases the process includes four phases: analysis, pilot testing, rollout, and the migration of existing charts.
Why is analyzing real usage so important?
It reveals which teams, chart types, and requirements truly matter when selecting and introducing the new solution.
What happens during the pilot phase?
Selected users test the new add-in with real use cases. This helps confirm that it works reliably in day-to-day workflows.
How long does the switch usually take?
Depending on the size of the organization, a structured transition can often be completed within three to six months.
What happens to existing charts?
Existing charts are typically migrated or converted gradually so the previous add-in can be phased out step by step.
What role do communication and training play?
They are essential for adoption and a smooth rollout. Users should be informed early and supported with appropriate training.
How does empower support this transition?
empower provides support not only on the technical side, but also with pilot programs, communication, training, migration, and practical experience from previously completed projects.