You are currently browsing the Public Sector Billing Blog weblog archives for the day 3. 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 | ||
- permit billing software (2)
- product manager (8)
- projects (47)
- property tax billing software (14)
- property tax billing software (9)
- resourcing (5)
- smart meters (1)
- software selection (3)
- tax billing software (61)
- vendors (55)
- water billing software (76)
- water supply (5)
- 21. May 2012: Valuing polluted land
- 20. May 2012: Paying property taxes
- 20. May 2012: Justifying price hikes
- 18. May 2012: Enforcing property tax collection
- 18. May 2012: Property tax reform shelved?
- 17. May 2012: Giving detailed usage data to customers
- 16. May 2012: Frequent water reads
- 16. May 2012: Having water to sell
- 15. May 2012: Cutting water waste
- 15. May 2012: The water job market
projects
Archive for 3. 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 »