Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Feb | Feb » | |||||
| 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 | |
Categories
- product manager (7)
- projects (40)
- resourcing (4)
- software selection (2)
- tax billing software (33)
- vendors (49)
- water billing software (39)
Latest Postings
- 11. February 2012: The role of the regulator
- 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
Links
projects
Archives
User groups
How useful are user groups? That’s very much dependant on how much the members contribute. They can operate as workshops for ideas for maximising the existing version of the software and as forums for the vendor to discuss potential new ideas. We always try to gauge the strength and role of the local user group when assessing an application’s suitability to implementing at a site, and the convenor of the nearest user group is always on our list of referees, whether the vendor has listed them or not.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.