But it's more emerging and smaller customers that have higher penetration of QualityDocs, if I understand correctly.

Typically, yes. In top 20 pharma, there's good penetration for QualityDocs, but it's higher for QMS now. This is because, even with fewer users in QMS than in QualityDocs, most top 20 pharma companies might not love their document management but find it compliant enough. However, QMS involves high-risk items like deviations, CAPAs, and change controls, which are higher compliance risks. That's why more top 20 companies prioritize replacing QMS first, as it poses greater compliance concerns compared to Document Management.

How did you evaluate the win rate across segments and products? Were there major differences, like a segment or product where the win rate was particularly high or low? How did you approach that?

I would say the win rate for documents and QMS among the top 20 is actually very high. It is rare for Veeva to lose there. If they do, it's usually because the client wants the software to fit their needs, not the other way around, which is uncommon since the industry trend is to standardize processes. Companies are encouraged to align with industry standards rather than being unique.

If the initial implementation is typically a few QMS modules for the top 20, what is usually the second step? Timeline-wise, when do you typically see the expansion happening?

Those five are the core elements of QMS: deviation, CAPA, change control, audit, supplier quality. Complaints depends how customers choose to do it because they have other systems and outsource a lot of the intake for that, but complaints may also be in that list. Once those boxes are checked, they usually say let's take a break from QMS and look at the Document Management side to bring that in.