You are currently browsing the archives for the software selection category.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Apr | ||||||
| 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 | ||||
- 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 the software selection Category
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 »