You are currently browsing the Public Sector Billing Blog weblog archives for April, 2010.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Mar | Jun » | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | ||
- product manager (7)
- projects (40)
- resourcing (4)
- software selection (1)
- tax billing software (32)
- vendors (49)
- water billing software (38)
- 19. April 2011: User groups
- 19. April 2011: Detecting theft
- 13. February 2011: Automated water meter reads
- 27. January 2011: What German utility billing software would that be?
- 5. November 2010: Seven myths of billing implementations
- 24. October 2010: Comparing utility billing software
- 1. October 2010: Failing in the public sector
- 29. September 2010: Project failures
- 27. September 2010: Not the product manager
- 25. September 2010: Not the product roadmap
projects
Archive for April 2010
Screwing up
3. April 2010 by admin.
The Register has a recent, chatty article about successful implementations – ERP (again) but the general principles apply. Their first point goes to the heart of the services we offer:
It’s obviously necessary to define your requirements appropriately and select a package that fits. Indeed, one of the most prominent recommendations coming back from Reg readers is to minimise the amount of development work associated with customisations and extensions. You can only do this if you start out with a reasonable match between the software and your requirements. And of course when modifications to standard functionality are necessary it helps if the software you have chosen is based on an open platform that is easy to work with from a development and integration perspective.
Posted in software selection, resourcing, projects, vendors, water billing software | Print | 1 Comment »
When things go wrong
2. April 2010 by admin.
Good communication is one of the best ways to identify the red flags that pop up when something starts to go wrong with an implementation. A lack of good communication can be one of the first warning signs that an implementation is in danger of failing. Another important component to keeping an implementation on track is to have a project lead acting as a liaison. If there is a lack of leadership or if no one is championing the project within the business, the implementation can fail.
Once an implementation does run into trouble, the chances of turning it around depend on the nature of the problem. The first thing to do is take a step back and look at the situation to pinpoint how the system is not meeting expectations.
And sometimes you just have to start all over again.
Posted in projects | Print | No Comments »