Autodesk is pushing organizations using multi-user licenses to transition to named user licenses. The transition program was launched in May 2020, and since then the vendor has repeatedly postponed the final date because it is becoming clear that this “minor” change is a huge challenge for organizations. Why? Because without understanding how the Autodesk software inventory is being used, the transition to named licenses may cause serious damage to an organization.
Autodesk license consumption in numbers – example
Let’s say we have an organization with 100 users. Each has access to AutoCAD, because the organization has 30 network (multi-user) licenses, which covers their needs. Out of the hundred employees, there are at least three levels of users.
The first level consists of roughly 50 people, the designers, who use AutoCAD six hours per day. They use the application because they produce the drawings.
The second level consists of the managers of the designers, about 20 people. They use AutoCAD for one or two hours per day to check the drawings.
Then there is a third level, the top managers, about 10 people, who use AutoCAD only once a month to check what has actually been done, check a comment from a customer, or maybe add their signature to a drawing.
Finally, there are the remaining users, 30 people, who yet again occasionally launch AutoCAD to check where the project is heading to and communicate with customers. They use it only a couple times per year.
What does Autodesk offer this organization?
Through its transition program, Autodesk is offering this organization 60 named user licenses in exchange for 30 network licenses, and they commit to charging the current rate for the licenses for the next couple years.
The major problem with Autodesk’s offer
There is a major problem with this offer, however. Until now, this organization has built a workflow based on concurrent licensing, and everyone had access to AutoCAD when needed. Now, the SAM/license manager of the organization will need to select only 60 people, who will have access to AutoCAD. They cannot rely on Autodesk: it isn’t much help here, because it doesn’t have the data about
- who is using which application;
- which feature(s);
- for how long;
- how many denials they encountered;
- how many license managers they have, etc.
The vendor doesn’t have any idea of the workflow and license consumption habits within the organization. That’s the data license monitoring and management tools such as OpenLM provides. The vendor just forces the organization to accept the trade-in deal.
What Autodesk doesn’t offer is licenses to the rest of the balance, 40 people. This means, these people will have no access to AutoCAD after the transition, except if the organization purchases licenses for them.
What does this mean? Simply put, this means a big hole in the budget and a challenge for the organization when planning an optimal transition from network/multi-user license to named user licenses.