Switching a chart add-in: More than a licensing decision?

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? 

Add-in changes at a glance

• Switching a chart add-in is not just a licensing decision. 
• Comparing features and prices alone is insufficient. 
• A credible business case evaluates both fixed costs and internal effort. 
• Success requires structured analysis, piloting, rollout, and migration. 
• With disciplined planning, implementation within three to six months is realistic. 
• Companies such as Bayer and Brose have successfully completed this transition. 

Functionality and price aren't the only things that matter 

When organizations evaluate a new chart add-in, two questions typically dominate: 

1. Which solution matches the features of our current tool?
2. Which solution offers the lowest price? 

Both are reasonable starting points. However, they do not go far enough. They focus narrowly on functionality and licensing fees, while overlooking: 

• the operational steps required to execute the transition 
• internal administrative workload 
• commercial implications of license growth 
• actual usage patterns across the organization 

A chart add-in is not a standalone product. It is embedded in daily processes and reporting structures. 

What questions should be asked when changing add-ins? 

If features and price are only part of the equation, what should leadership be asking? 

• Which solution enables all users to complete their work efficiently over the long term? 
• How can the transition be designed in a structured and predictable manner? 
• How do we ensure consistent, professional chart standards across the entire organization? 
• How do we maintain cost transparency while minimizing internal administrative effort? 

Only this broader perspective supports a sound, future-proof decision. 

Evaluating the business case correctly 

Annual license fees, including projected increases, are easy to quantify. Internal effort is just as significant, including: 

• license administration 
• IT maintenance and updates 
• contract negotiations and renewals 
• cross-department coordination 

A robust business case evaluates licensing costs and internal effort together. Focusing exclusively on licensing fees provides an incomplete financial picture. 

Understanding how the software is actually used 

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: 

• Which departments rely most heavily on the tool? 
• Which chart types are most common? 
• How are those charts structured in practice? 
• What formatting standards, combinations, or custom elements are typical? 

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 structured transition model 

A successful transition typically follows four phases. 

1. Analysis

Identify high-usage departments. Collect representative examples. Systematically review the most common chart types and their configurations based on actual content.

2. Pilot Phase

Select users test the new solution using real business scenarios. Evaluation is data-driven and focuses on:

• Full replication of relevant chart types 
• Reliable conversion of existing charts 
• Preservation of productivity and workflow speed 

Only after measurable validation should the rollout proceed. 

3. Rollout 

Introduce the new add-in company-wide, supported by:

• structured communication 
• targeted training sessions 
• advanced training for high-volume users 
• high-quality enablement materials 

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. 

4. Enterprise-wide Migration and Decommissioning

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. 

Realistic timeline 

Depending on organizational size and user volume, the transition can typically be completed within three to six months. 

Proven in practice 

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: 

• detailed usage analysis 
• data-driven piloting 
• implementation of an empower^® enterprise license 
• structured rollout 
• systematic chart conversion and tool replacement 

Both organizations have been working successfully with empower^®  for years. 

Conclusion 

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.