We performed a comparison between Infor M3 and NetSuite OneWorld based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two ERP solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is highly customizable."
"It's very stable, and it handles all types of industrial and manufacturing businesses in very good ways. I've found it to be easy."
"It's simple to use. You don't need any complex training to use it."
"The most valuable feature of Infor M3 is the level of detail it has about the different manufacturing processes compared to other ERP solutions. Other ERP solutions provide the same level of integration as Infor M3, but Infor M3 specializes in several functions, such as planning and manufacturing."
"M3 has several useful features for managing supply chains, production, and customer orders. It's an excellent system that helps me meet all my requirements for fixed costs."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the Infor GL tool that allows us to do our application support and development."
"Infor M3 has tailor-made packages for each and every industry."
"Its ease of use is most valuable. Inquiries are transparent, and it shows good information on each screen. We don't have to go to 14 different screens to find out about one item, which is a big advantage."
"NetSuite OneWorld is a single instance that allows you to do different business functions, such as reporting, order-to-cash, design-build, and procure-to-pay. This feature is what's most valuable in the solution."
"The solution is user-friendly and flexible."
"Utilizes best practices that are simple to implement."
"The executive dashboards have satisfied the founders and leadership with up to the minute information. This allows them to make high level decisions."
"NetSuite is a great solution, fast to bring up and makes everyone's life easier."
"Allows us to use it the way we need to instead of changing our needs and processes to fit the product."
"We've set up Jira integration and used robotic process automation (RPA) to streamline various processes, like procurement and invoicing. Some processes still require manual approval, like supplier invoices, but we're simplifying those too. We're also exploring integrating with other tools like Power BI for better data analytics and reporting. Currently, our automation focuses on general tasks, not document understanding or anything complex like that."
"Lowers costs, produces higher efficiencies, while maintaining a leaner staff and produces advanced financials."
"The solution must provide more learning documents."
"Its initial setup was probably complex, but it is a very good system."
"The solution is stable but not agile."
"The solution's technical support is an area with shortcomings that need improvement, especially the support for the product named M3 rather than the support offered by Infor as an organization."
"The implementation could be simplified, it's complex."
"An area for improvement in Infor M3 is training. There should be more training resources available for clients. Clients also find it challenging to get consultants or integrators for Infor M3. The product doesn't have enough resources in the market to help clients."
"It would be great if Infor added some new workflows in the finance module. I'd also like to see better integration with third-party applications."
"Sometimes, M3 alone cannot handle all the planning functionalities required by a customer. It has to be used along with industry-specific planning tools because M3 doesn't have all the features. However, no product can handle all the requirements of all the industries. There will be some shortcomings in all the products. Though this is an area for improvement, it is not a very serious shortfall or limitation. It can be covered by using third-party planning applications that integrate with Infor M3."
"I don’t like the SaaS models. Of course, they make the tool powerful enough to run a billion-dollar business. The tool is cheaper than SAP or Core."
"Project collaboration through Dashboard Business Management and Relations Management is easy to perform, but it does need to be worked on as it is difficult for customers, suppliers, and internal users to use."
"If you were to use standard costs, it doesn't handle standard costs well."
"Some entities are not available for multiple subsidiaries, which requires duplication."
"Certain analytics features are missing that I've come to expect from other systems. Additionally, there are occasional issues with data accuracy that need to be addressed. Overall, deeper analytics capabilities would greatly improve the tool's usefulness for me."
"In NetSuite OneWorld, what needs improvement is the production planning functionality."
"There is not a 20 year pedigree of pharma experience in the NetSuite channel. While there are many of these CMO Pharma companies rapidly moving to NetSuite, there are few consultants with true pharma experience. Those who have experience are stretched pretty thin."
"Currently, NetSuite OneWorld needs to be more mature, especially compared to SAP."
Infor M3 is ranked 12th in ERP with 13 reviews while NetSuite OneWorld is ranked 14th in ERP with 13 reviews. Infor M3 is rated 8.2, while NetSuite OneWorld is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Infor M3 writes "The solution is a reliable, stable, and cost-saving ERP". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetSuite OneWorld writes "Customizable with great integration capabilities and very good stability". Infor M3 is most compared with SAP ERP, Infor LN, SAP S/4HANA, Infor CloudSuite Industrial and Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, whereas NetSuite OneWorld is most compared with NetSuite ERP, SAP Business One, Microsoft Dynamics 365 Business Central, JD Edwards EnterpriseOne and SAP S/4HANA. See our Infor M3 vs. NetSuite OneWorld report.
See our list of best ERP vendors.
We monitor all ERP reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
