| a. |
When did your firm implement its APS Advance
Practice Management system |
We implemented APS Advance Enterprise edition
on 30th June 2003 for a total of 350 users. |
| b. |
Which APS products have you taken out licences to use? |
We have taken on Advance Practice Management and Practice
IQ. |
| c. |
Who was you previous supplier and how long were you
using that supplier’s software for? |
Before the switch, we were with Solution6 for 12+ years |
| d. |
From start to finish, how long did the meeting, testing
and decision-making process take that saw you move over
to APS? |
The whole process took 24 months in total. Implementation
took four months from signing the contract to “go-live” |
| e. |
Was your decision to move over to APS made on gut-feel,
or was it more scientific than that? Please explain how
you went about making your decision…. |
It was more scientific than that – we defined
our requirements, and tested APS’s systems through
thorough demonstrations and detailed discussions with
the APS team. We then installed a sample and began testing. |
| f. |
APS prides itself on its ability to listen to its customers
regarding their business needs and business aims and
its commitment to then work closely with customers to
meet and achieve them. Tell us about the APS approach
from your perspective… |
Fiona Harding has handled our
implementation to date - they are very accommodating
and have been able to meet most of our needs. They tell
us the truth even if it is not what we wish to hear!
They generally have a can do attitude that wills them
to find a way to meet our needs rather than discounting
them as “undoable”. |
| a. |
Functionality
Testing |
|
| i. |
Looking at APS from a product perspective,
what were the most important factors from a functionality
point-of-view that were seen as critical to your business – the
things that APS had to have if it was to be considered
as a your practice management and tax preparation software
provider? |
The most important factors from a functionality
point-of-view for us were as follows:
•
|
a modern software platform; |
| • |
a solid development path; |
| • |
flexibility to meet our unique needs; and |
| • |
easy to use interfaces |
And, ultimately, the three things that helped us come to a final decision
on selecting APS were:
•
|
development path record; |
| • |
the APS billings process; and |
| • |
list functionality. |
|
| ii. |
Did you feel that APS was ahead of its competitors
in terms of its functionality and how did you verify
the fact? |
Advance’s functionality is equal to its competitors
(Viztopia and CMS Open) but its screen flow as demonstrated
was much more in tune with our way of thinking. |
| iii. |
How long did you pilot and test the Advance product
set for functionality – and how many people were
involved? Was the APS team accommodating in this process
or did your APS contacts press you to make an early decision? |
We tested Advance thoroughly for 3 months – our
team was made up of one Partner, the Director of Finance
and the Director of Operations. The APS team was very
accommodating throughout the process. |
| b. |
Ease-of-use
testing |
|
i.
|
From a functionality point of view you have told us
why you moved to APS. Ease-of-use is also important:
how did you make sure that Advance is easy-to-use from
a practitioners’ perspective? |
We made sure by testing the products. The demonstrations
we received also satisfied us that Advance would be easy
to use. |
ii.
|
Was testing ‘ease-of-use’ an important
part of your testing process? If so, how did you test
the product set for ease of use? |
Yes it was. Our test was to start using Advance without
the manual to give us an idea about how easy it would
be for our team to pick up and use. Advance passed that
test. |
| c. |
Future Development |
|
| |
What would you like to see APS add to its product set
in its next releases of Advance that will assist your
business? What does it need to do to stay ahead of its
competitors? |
We would like to see functionality that links APS to
any other system, examples being Caseware, BGL simple
Super, AXYS, and Praemium. |
| Were the following factors important to
you in determining if APS was the right provider for
your firm to go with:- |
| a. |
The fact that APS is a profitable business?
APS prides itself on the fact that it has posted a profit
every year since inception in 1991 |
Yes, this was important to us. A software
house needs profits to reinvest into the continuing development
of their products |
| b. |
The fact that the Advance product set traces its lineage
and development path directly to its first release in
1994 ….. there has been no deviation from the product
roadmap – merely incremental annual upgrades to
the product. This has meant that customers have not had
to waste time and money implementing new systems on an
intermittent basis |
Yes, this was also important to us. The continuity
shows that the developers understand technology and where
it is heading. It also shows they understand the workings
of an accounting practice. |
| c. |
What other corporate stability factors would you recommend
that firms should consider when choosing a Practice Management
system supplier? |
Any supplier needs to understand the current issues
in our business and show a willingness to provide solutions
in a short timeframe. APS has this capability and we
feel that we have a voice in their development process. |
