http://www.constellationfs.com/ Constellation Financing Systems Corporation is the premier software and service provider of lease and loan management systems to leading financial institutions, leasing companies, and equipment manufacturers. news.aspx?id=9 ST. PETERSBURG, FL, July 8, 2008 - Constellation Financing Systems, the premier software and service provider of lease and loan management systems and software solutions to the equipment leasing and financing industry, announced today the implementation of its Edge front end software system for Trans Lease, Inc. of Denver, CO, a national trucking and transportation leasing and finance company. "We're excited at the opportunity to help Trans Lease gain the advantage of the Edge platform," says Michael C. Cumby, Chief Architect of Constellation Financing Systems. "We have designed our solution to be flexible enough to meet the needs of all types of companies and are proud of the fact that an automotive financing company like Trans Lease can realize significant gains in efficiency and productivity through our product." The Edge platform, which handles all of the front-end processing for the company, replaced several legacy systems. Jim Mathisen, Sr. VP of Operations for Trans Lease, states "Our previous systems were not keeping up with current technology so we set out to find the best solution for our business. We were interested in a workflow solution that included contact management, credit review, vendor programs and documentation, as well as interfaces to our new lease/loan accounting and general ledger systems." The open architecture and rich data model of Edge allowed Trans Lease to choose the accounting systems that they wanted and to build an easily deployable, "best of breed" solution. Mathisen cited two main factors that drove his decision. "We researched many different solutions and selected Edge as the best fit for our requirements. The flexibility of the Edge product and the responsiveness of the company as a vendor played a significant role in our choice," says Mathisen. "And the price represented a very good value for the system we obtained," he adds. "We are very pleased with the outcome of this implementation and the help provided during and after the transition." About Trans Lease Trans Lease Inc. is one of Americas fastest growing and most successful independent Lease and Finance Companies. Headquartered in Denver, CO, Trans Lease serves all 50 states with local representation using branded one-on-one relationship based selling. The Company's success is based upon employing a highly trained and motivated staff and arming them with only the best tools, a winning combination that leads to Trans Lease's "Elite Customer Service". Focused on the transportation industry, Trans Lease is recognized as a Monitor 100 company. About Constellation Software Constellation Software is an international provider of market leading software and services to a number of industries across both the public and private sectors. The Company acquires, manages and builds vertical market software businesses that provide mission critical software solutions to address the specific needs of its customers in those industries. Constellation Financing Systems is the premier software and service provider of end-to-end lease and loan management systems to the equipment finance industry, including leading financial institutions, leasing companies, and equipment manufacturers. Media Inquiries Cha Loh cloh@constellationfs.com (289) 291-4999 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:46:24 GMT news.aspx?id=9 news.aspx?id=8 Constellation Financing Systems will be exhibiting at the upcoming ELFA Operations and Technology Conference. The conference is being held at the Westin Michigan Avenue in Chicago, IL from May 21st to the 23rd, 2008. Please come by and visit us at our booth. Thu, 08 May 2008 11:35:21 GMT news.aspx?id=8 news.aspx?id=6 Constellation Software Inc. ("Constellation") (TSX: CSU) announced today that it has completed, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Constellation Financing Systems Corp., the acquisition of the assets of the Finance Edge business from Finance Edge LLC. "The acquisition of Finance Edge provides Constellation the opportunity to expand our offerings in the asset finance vertical market and apply our proven operational models and strategies" said Dexter Salna, President of Constellation Homebuilders Division "While not a large acquisition by Constellation standards, we are excited that we have been able to build upon a new vertical market that we recently entered." About Constellation Financing Systems Constellation Financing Systems is the premier software and service provider of lease and loan management systems to leading financial institutions, leasing companies, and equipment manufacturers. About Constellation HomeBuilder Systems As the largest homebuilding software company in the industry, Constellation has helped more than 1,400 homebuilding companies manage their information technology costs with integrated software solutions to run their business from dirt to warranty. From planning to homeowner services, we have land development software, new home sales and marketing software, production, purchasing, scheduling, accounting, warranty and vendor portal solutions designed exclusively for the homebuilding industry. About Constellation Software Inc Constellation's common shares are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange under the symbol "CSU". Constellation Software is an international provider of market leading software and services to a number of industries across both the public and private sectors. The Company acquires, manages and builds vertical market software businesses that provide mission - critical software solutions to address the specific needs of its customers in those industries. Forward Looking Statements Certain statements herein may be "forward looking" statements that involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Constellation or the industry to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These statements reflect current assumptions and expectations regarding future events and operating performance and speak only as of the date hereof. Forward looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties, should not be read as guarantees of future performance or results, and will not necessarily be accurate indications of whether or not such results will be achieved. A number of factors could cause actual results to vary significantly from the results discussed in the forward looking statements. These forward looking statements are made as of the date hereof and Constellation assumes no obligation to update any forward looking statements to reflect new events or circumstances. For further information, contact: John Billowits Chief Financial Officer Constellation Software (416) 861-2279 info@csisoftware.com www.csisoftware.com Mon, 17 Mar 2008 05:43:37 GMT news.aspx?id=6 news.aspx?id=5 Constellation Financing Systems is pleased to announce that they will be holding their first User Conference on April 10th and 11th, 2008 at the Sheraton Hotel in downtown Toronto. For more information, please contact Tiffany Thibeault at tthibeault@constellationfs.com. Fri, 22 Feb 2008 05:29:06 GMT news.aspx?id=5 news.aspx?id=3 Achieving ROI with a New Lease and Loan System David Taylor, Vice President of Constellation Financing Systems Corp. Published in the World Leasing Yearbook 2008 Knowing when to invest in technology support for a business is an art not a science. Ideally we all try to time our move to achieve the perfect intersection of newly available technology, a reduction in system costs, an increase system capability, and the solution to a pressing business needs. All other things being equal, early adopters of new technology will sometimes pay highly for being the first - Exhibit A, The Apple iPhone. Late adopters will certainly pay less, achieve a safe transformation, but may limit their business growth with such a delay. So how easy is it to get a good return on the investment? During the 1980's and 1990's, this was a simple issue. If you had a mainframe system, the arrival of office environment servers and relational databases gave both big cost reductions and dramatically increased access to information. New software companies were able to build relatively cheap, functionally capable systems which were leaps and bounds ahead of the systems they were replacing. A large number of the established vendors in this market trace their origins to this time. Issues like which flavour of Unix, which chipset, which semi-proprietary system architecture, dominated discussions. Around the same time, the decision of which database and software tools to choose would be sure to add spice to any technical discussion. But now the question for the computer industry might be "So what have you done for me lately?" What's new? Oracle and Microsoft have both been providing credible databases for long enough to make the choice a non-issue. Specialist players like Progress have a similar track record and product excellence. Linux has become an established operating system and Intel, AMD, Sun and Apple all produce fast reliable hardware. Most of us conduct large parts of our lives interacting with the web and e-mail as an everyday event. The average teenager spends six and a half hours a day in some form of media activity. So what's so tough about applying these stable tools to our business? The question and the answer is ROI. We have an industry where growth has slowed, if not stopped, in past years, where new regulatory and accounting compliance issues have dominated thinking, and now, with a collapse of confidence in certain areas of funding. For a small company, or a startup operation relying on spreadsheets or rudimentary tools the equation is, perhaps more simple. At what point do I need to hire more people in a linear fashion to grow my business? At what point will my funders and auditors require me to have robust professional systems? At that level of operation, too, there have been some excellent starter systems, attractively priced, fast and easy to implement, and often available as a service with little or no upfront capital payment. What they lack in sophistication, they make up for in instant availability. The ROI calculation relies more on continued growth and access to good funding rates than it does to any changes in business process. Doing more with the same or less people and providing sound data to funding partners goes hand in hand with extending system access to business partners - dealers, brokers, funders and end customers. ROI becomes harder to identify when we move to the next level and beyond. There are systems in place already, mostly doing a good job, but beginning to show some limitations in capability. It may be that they have become cumbersome to use, involve a lot of manual workarounds, or don't fully support the diversity of financial products the company wants to take to market. They may provide less than optimal asset tracking, accounting treatments, or contract change functions. Nevertheless, they are a known commodity, and over time the organization has developed ways of working with them. Where a system becomes obsolete or is no longer supported, business continuity considerations will override simple ROI calculations. But when the system is just getting to be too unwieldy, it may be just like the old dog resting on a nail on the porch who howls from time to time, but doesn't get up and move - it just doesn't hurt enough. Worse than no demonstrable ROI, system change may involve not just direct costs of hardware, software and services, but may add to in house staff costs in the short or even medium term. Staff will need to be retrained, and will need to develop new processes and procedures in line with the new and different system capabilities. Staff will need to work with the new system vendor to define and reconcile the data conversion processes. Charts of account and system generated financial postings will need to be determined and verified. Test cases will be developed, expected results calculated and compared to actual new system outputs. Interfaces to other systems will, at best need to be setup and tested, and at worst built from the ground up. There will be a need to consider other complimentary systems within the organization to determine if they will fit well with the new system, or whether they, too, may need replacement. All of these activities will form part of the implementation process, and will involve the organization's key staff - those staff that cannot be spared from their regular full time tasks. At the time when these key employees are busy coping with an old system and its workarounds, that's when they need to be involved in the search for a new system and in its implementation. The search for a system has been well documented elsewhere, and is not the primary focus of this article. It will be an intensive, time consuming process, involving the definition of success criteria, listing of system attributes and vendor capabilities, evaluations and presentations. In terms of time and cost, however, it will be a distant second place to the commitment needed for implementation at this level. To achieve measurable results from system change, the organization will have to be disciplined in its definitions of successful outcomes and the value it ascribes to them. It will also have to set realistic timeframes for achieving successful outcomes, with the knowledge that initial costs may rise and efficiencies drop. This, of course, sounds like heresy from a system vendor. Selling systems with the promise that it'll cost you more and make you less efficient doesn't usually work so well. The big "but" is that it will, over time allow you to be more effective and allow you to grow your business more cost effectively. Allowing someone to do something doesn't necessarily mean that they will do it. A system change will allow the redefinition of business processes to take advantage of new capabilities. It will not mandate it. So, to really achieve a return on the investment in replacing an older generation system in a larger organization, we have to set some clear and measurable objectives. If all this sounds a bit far fetched, it's like all commonsense - not that common. In particular, there has to be an awareness that there is a pain barrier to get through - a point where cost and effort increase before both start to decrease. The questions we will ask ourselves are simple. What are we looking to achieve? How will we measure this and know when we've gotten there? How long will it take? How will we monitor our progress? What is plan B if we're not on track? What are the risks associated with achieving this success. If we are searching in our answers, we can understand the risk profile of the project. High gains, short duration, few risk factors lead to a high probability of success. Marginal gains, hard to measure, long duration, and lots of risk factors and dependencies lead to a low probability of success. Assuming we're good so far and that we've set out our objectives, defined our measurements, allocated staff time, accepted the level of risk, and understood the timescales, we can now create a project plan and allocate responsibilities. Again, to those with a project management background this will all seem to be basic stuff. But to those of us whose daily task is running a finance company, system change is something we may do once in ten years. By the time we come to do it again, we have forgotten both the pain and the skills required. Project management is not, it seems like learning to ride a bike. Once learned, it's all too soon forgotten. So, unless we are blessed with project management skills, we need to look for a good project manager inside or outside the company. Finance companies and system vendors will now get down to the task of agreeing who does what and by when. It's vital to have both parties understand how success will be measured, and to get common buy-in to the objectives of the project. If the finance house places great emphasis on cash holdbacks, and the vendor places emphasis on payment on delivery, there will be continuous tensions focusing both parties on the main task - achieving the measurable benefits. Over time the software industry has produced some pretty good tools for defining the software that needs to be delivered. They have similarly developed some good processes for converting data, training customers and rolling out new modules. None of this however guarantees a successful outcome. A well worn phrase "it's just what I asked for but it's not what I want" sums up the worst of all outcomes. We efficiently, and in a well documented, on-time manner deliver something which doesn't get the results our customer is looking for. All over the world people buy Black and Decker drills - not because they want a drill, but because they want a hole. The drill is just the tool - the hole is the desired outcome. We have to remember that the delivery of software is a tool. Its effective use by our customer is the first step of a successful outcome. So if that's only the first step, what are the others? Ten years ago the phrase "business process re-engineering" was on everyone's lips and Mike Hammer's books could be found on most managers bookshelves - in all industries. Today, we hear less of it - perhaps because it turned out to be harder than we thought to re-engineer a business. But if we are really to achieve the business potential of a system change we will have to look again at our organization and carry out a zero based budgeting exercise start to finish. (That is, if we are looking to justify our investment other than through business growth) don't understand. We will look at every step of our processes, not just to determine their efficiency but also their necessity. If a process can be done better, we have to ask, does it need to be done at all? If it does need to be done then ask "is it producing the right results?" And finally, we ask, "can I measure the results before and after the process change?". Over the years many well meaning organizations have produced standards which have done nothing to take businesses forward. Other than a logo on a letterhead and some copy for the annual report, it is possible that achieving bland formulaic performance standards was substituted for thinking. Thinking is hard work. Actually deciding how to run a business better, then setting out to make changes is hard work. It upsets people, it can lead to mistakes - it can get you fired. Following a well beaten path down the international or corporate standards route will not. Nor, though, will it revitalize a waning business, grow profits, or excite staff and customers. Who would think that achieving ROI could become a rallying cry for business change and for putting excitement back into the workplace? But it can be. If everyone in the organization buys into clear, understandable, measurable outcomes, and can have a well publicized plan to get there, then they can take pride in helping to deliver the results the organization are looking for. By saying, "we will achieve these results, in this timeframe, and will measure them as follows..." we can harness the collective knowledge and brainpower of the whole organization to get there. And if in the end someone says "you know I thought we were just going to install a new computer system; I had no idea we were going to see so many other improvements in our business..." Then you may just have done it right. About Constellation Financing Systems Constellation Financing Systems is the premier software and service provider of lease and loan management systems to leading financial institutions, leasing companies, and equipment manufacturers. Media Inquiries Tiffany Thibeault TThibeault@constellationfs.com (289) 291-4999 Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:05:54 GMT news.aspx?id=3 news.aspx?id=2 Getting "Back to Basics" David Taylor, Vice President of Constellation Financing Systems Corp. examines technology's role and its support for the Asset finance industry in today's competitive marketplace. Published in the World Leasing Yearbook 2004 Every decade has its own favourite jargon phrases, and the late 20th and early 21st centuries have certainly produced their share. During the 1980's two concepts found considerable favour - one with management gurus, the other with a number of political parties. For the managers looking to retreat from the failing growth strategies of diversified industrial conglomerates, the phrase "stick to your knitting" was coined. In essence, it meant, get back to doing those things you know you can do well, and don't mess with businesses you don't fully understand or with which you don't have any true synergy. GE, one of the few who managed to succeed as a conglomerate, has more and more focused on finance revenue as a growth mechanism. The politicians' version was championed by John Major, then Conservative Prime Minister of the UK - It was "back to basics" - an attractive concept following the boom Thatcher years which had seen financial and social excesses take over the once sober City of London financial and equity markets. It signified a return to traditional social and moral values and a retreat from the hedonistic excesses of new found and easily obtained wealth. Sadly for John Major the campaign backfired and his moral majority position became undermined by the political realities of scandals within his own party. There are, nonetheless, parallels between both those rallying calls and the present situation in which we find ourselves in considering the role of technology and its support for the Asset Finance industry. With interest rates currently lower than most senior and middle managers have ever seen in their lifetime there is little opportunity for finance companies to discriminate their products through better rates or lower prices. Customer and business partner service has become the main driver of business process change. The bursting of the dot-com bubble, and the failure of many acquisition and merger activities to generate acceptable returns, has led many organizations to re-examine what their core businesses should be about, and fueled a desire to "get back to basics". In the case of finance companies, that has meant seeking to provide better service while containing overhead costs. In many cases dramatically lower stock prices, especially in the telecoms and hi-tech sectors, has resulted in a freeze or at best a considerable reduction of capital budgets. System replacements or major enhancements, previously cost-justified by promises of increased business volume, have found little support during the past two years. Ambitious web-based business acquisition projects have been terminated, and business models and projections radically changed. The feeding frenzy of investment in web portals and hastily implemented e-business solutions of two years ago has matured into a carefully selected series of product / service offerings provided through more traditional channels, with the web supplementing those efforts. Many major financial institutions that had acquired businesses that were at best peripheral to their core competencies have begun the process of divestment or dramatic restructuring around those perceived competencies. Following the flight of investor confidence from the equity markets and increased governmental emphasis on business regulation in an attempt to redress this, audit and financial control have taken centre stage in Businesses Process Re-engineering (BPR) programs. The balance has shifted back towards business quality as well as business quantity. While it is an oversimplification to say that businesses have become wary of the promises of growth through improved technology, the emphasis is now on a more gradual growth process through the improvement and extension of existing processes. This has led to a desire to extend the reach of the enterprise by coming closer to business partners and existing customers. The resulting drive for improved customer and partner service has benefited from some of the technology fallout from the bursting of the dot-com bubble. The technologies and techniques, spawned by ambitious web based projects were flawed by faulty business models, not necessarily technical or operational problems. In the very best systems, wait times are short, and self-service is supplemented by contact with a representative at appropriate points in any transaction. Those same technologies and techniques, when applied to customer service operations, have produced significant benefits to companies and customers alike. By selectively providing traditional back-office functions direct to the customer online, and enabling simple and intuitive self-service operations, organizations can provide a more cost-effective and satisfactory customer interaction. In the same way that the irritations of automated voicemail systems are being replaced by more skillfully crafted mixes of automation and human intervention, organizations are learning to use the web to provide a blend of fast self service, married to easy access to knowledgeable customer service representatives. In the very best systems, wait times are short, and self-service is supplemented by contact with a representative at appropriate points in any transaction. Good customer interaction means giving the customer easy access to the detail of his transactions in a way that is understandable, fast, and intuitive. Customer service applies equally to dealers, brokers, vendor partners and funders, who may all be given access to information relating to their share of business transacted with the finance company. Each of these players may have slightly different information requirements, and will need the information which is important to them presented in different ways. In making such information readily available, security is, of course, a fundamentally important issue. Only the information that is legitimately the province of each enquirer must be made available, and security and content management has to be effective but not intrusive or unmanageable. Some of the best online banking applications are beginning to achieve this balance of security, access, and available human customer service. We are beginning to see examples of well-designed web sites providing access to services and information, previously buried in monolithic back office systems. Information has not only to be accurate, but also current and timely. This approach to customer service has not been readily available to all organizations. Not all back office systems have been receptive to web based information delivery. Not all can easily deliver the information in real time to the company's own staff, let alone across the web to those outside of the traditional enterprise. Clearly, the ability to interoperate with products developed using modern technologies is profoundly important. Information quality has to be assured or more harm than good will result from extending access. Information has not only to be accurate, but also current and timely. Organizations wanting to maintain close customer and partner contact whilst achieving low service overheads must also deal with other issues. For many, global reach is becoming a significant strategic issue. Extending operational efficiencies and striving for service excellence becomes even more of a challenge across geographic, language, cultural and accounting boundaries. Currency, tax, legal and marketing issues all add to the complexity mix of operating on a global basis. A common back office system, flexible enough to accommodate such a mix of transactional requirements, yet present a suitable local face to each jurisdiction will become a basic requirement for the successful global player. Support for local and regional accounting, legislative and reporting standards, with the ability to provide head office acceptable consolidations will be essential if organizations are to follow their customers and business partners into new territories, or to achieve process improvements in areas currently served by diverse and incompatible systems. Web enabled user interfaces will facilitate the task of providing local language, presentation and cultural variants, but will still require the expertise and support of powerful and capable administration systems behind the scenes. A range of financial products will need to be on offer, appropriate to the local market. This means market acceptability and competitiveness allied to fiscal compliance and an acceptable risk and profitability profile. Although accounting and regulatory practices are moving towards common international standards, they are not there yet, and subtleties and nuances exist even between geographically proximate markets. Capital spending restrictions will make an ASP or "Computing on demand" model attractive to many. For those organizations whose present systems are deficient, wholesale system replacement may not be a current option. As we have said, capital spending restrictions will make an ASP or "Computing on demand" model attractive to many. Similarly, selective replacement or upgrading of only those components least able to support business objectives may make good sense, leaving the "least worse" pieces of present systems in place and compensating for their shortcomings in complementary or partial replacement systems. We have already seen this process used to good effect in web front end systems providing a more user acceptable interface coupled with some simple functionality extensions, not easily achievable in old legacy back-office systems. Eventually, however, such cosmetic solutions themselves become unwieldy bringing dangers of data integrity failure and poorly managed integration. Another strategy which may be successfully applied is the selective system migration on a piecemeal basis, choosing one section of a portfolio, one suite of financial products, or one or two geographic regions. This has similar advantages to the more traditional use of pilot projects to prove concepts or retest capabilities, but allows the replacement of the most troublesome components of the business/ system capability mix with a view to a full rollout once concepts have been proven and capital becomes available. This strategy relies on new systems with considerable interoperability potential, since they will have to co-exist with a mixture of old and new systems for some time. This approach, too, requires the availability of significant systems integration expertise. This may be available in-house, from the supplier of one of the component systems, or from third party systems integrators. In terms of selecting major system components, we have seen a period of stability in the technology supporting the key pieces. Operating systems have become standardized at the server level around UNIX, Linux, and Intel platforms. Relational databases provided by the major industry players, Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, are substantially similar and relatively evolutionary products. Server hardware is highly capable, robust and cheap as are mass data storage devices. For the IT manager and business user, the technology poses relatively little risk of making a wrong choice, or one that will fast become obsolete. The key to system choices resides increasingly in selecting a knowledgeable, committed and competent business partner with the ability to deliver appropriate solutions within a predictable timeframe and cost structure. In that regard, little has changed in recent years. The selection of the parts, the order of implementation, and the method of payment will have more to do with decision making during the coming period than major technology choices or functionality directions. We pretty much all know where we want to go - it's a matter of choosing the right partner and figuring out how far, how fast, and at what cost. About Constellation Financing Systems Constellation Financing Systems is the premier software and service provider of lease and loan management systems to leading financial institutions, leasing companies, and equipment manufacturers. Media Inquiries Tiffany Thibeault TThibeault@constellationfs.com (289) 291-4999 Thu, 21 Feb 2008 11:02:44 GMT news.aspx?id=2 news.aspx?id=1 David Taylor, Vice President of Constellation Financing Systems Corp. provides a guide to best practice for selecting software systems in the Asset-based Financing Industry. Published by the Canadian Finance & Leasing Association 2004 As in many human endeavours, spectacular successes are well publicized and spectacular failures long remembered. Efforts in the middle ground are often less easy to analyze as to success or failure. With system software implementations, 'Fear of failure' and 'Hope for Success' are fairly evenly represented within the management community. In seeking advice on how best to go about it, I believe it helps if you are honest about your own hopes and fears and offer some guidelines for both the optimists and pessimists amongst us. The Objectives for Optimists These may usually be summarized as achieving: . More business with less overhead . New channels to market . Improved customer service . More competitive financial products . Enable new partnerships . Reduced delinquency and provisions . Attract new funding sources Optimists may measure the success of their project in terms of: . Business growth % / Overhead % increase . Volume $ of new channels business . Performance of service level agreements . Value $ from new financial products . No. and quality of new partnerships . Reduced delinquency % . No. of new funders and $ benefit The Objectives for Pessimists Often expressed as "We just want to.. . Replace our old system . Keep the users happy . Avoid making the wrong decision . Not spend too much . Get the job done quickly For Pessimists, the measures are, as you would expect, a lot less ambitious. . The old system is switched off . We can live with it . We kept within budget . The business users are busy . I still have a job For both groups, the task and means of completing it should be the same, and should broadly follow these basic steps: . Define objectives . Establish success criteria and measures . Set a target timetable . Assess the resources needed . Fill shortfalls and assemble the team . Project manager prepares project plan Project Planning As the project begins to take shape, the following activities need to be undertaken: . Appoint a Steering Group . Create an Essential Needs Statement . Prepare the team . Research available systems . Plan the selection process . Allocate the time and begin! The project now moves into its research phase in order to determine the answers to some basic questions as they relate to that particular organization. . Should we build or buy? . What systems are available? . What technology platforms should we adopt? . Who can help us with this process? . How much will we invest? . What is our payback period? The Selection Process There are some sound, well tried, approaches to the selection process which will usually yield a good but not unmanageable list of candidates. These steps should produce a progressively filtered field of candidates: . Define a first level requirements search . Be sure to ask key show stopper questions covering: - Functionality - Technology - Experience - Company size . And be sure to define clear pass and fail responses . Create the first shortlist . Invite companies to the first "Show and Tell" session In parallel with this, the team should be working at defining the needs of the business, again using a clear formulaic approach. . Set detailed business objectives . Have the business users define their requirements in terms of: - Existing tasks in existing areas - New tasks in existing areas - New business areas - New corporate requirements . Check everyone's understanding of both the task and the reason for the requirement. . Define realistic volumes and likely future growth requirements. Challenge all assumptions fearlessly, whoever may have made them! The supplier & system selection process should now allow the use of checklists and scorecards, derived from the requirements definition process. The most usual pattern will involve: . Issuing a Request for Proposal . Evaluating the responses . Checking everyone's understanding again Now comes several days of face-to-face demonstrations and discussions with the short listed suppliers. This process, which should take into account everyone's limited tolerance for viewing screen after screen, is best undertaken in sections interspersing show and tell with discussion and negotiation sessions. Avoid the temptation to submit your team to 'over-long' days, or 'over-long' sessions. These topics will need to be covered in depth: . Functionality gaps from the requirements definition . Apparent ease of use and intuitive presentation . The suppliers financial accounts and business model . The future business and technology direction for the supplier . Customer references and descriptions of what each reference site may offer . Supplier support contracts and definition of how they operate . An initial project plan and the underlying assumptions on which it is . Identification and high level definition of required interfaces . Technical issues for hardware, software and communications . Supplier and own team availability and composition . Costs and Contract terms Supplier & Software Selection Proposal Once the supplier evaluation has been completed, the team will produce a supplier and software selection proposal to be presented to senior management or corporate board. This should include: . The match offered to the defined business objectives . A clear specification of all deliverables . A definition of the project phases and milestones . A specification of the project pieces & their ownership in both supplier and company. Descriptions will be provided of the services offered, responsibilities and scope for: . Project Management . Specifications . Installation . Testing . Training . Technical Integration . Additional third party systems . Locations . Communications . Cost Management Communication Plan Once the company has made its selection and implementation decision, it is fundamentally important to develop a corporate plan that communicates to all staff: . What we are buying . Who is doing what . Our acceptance process . The timetable . How we will measure success . Which system and company we will be working with . Why we made this decision Communication should continue throughout the project, praising effort, celebrating success and honestly reporting setbacks or changed priorities. It is important to remember the often-conflicting objectives and guidelines we set ourselves! . We want long proven New Technology! . A dedicated team available immediately! Bear in mind: . Your corporate risk profile is unique . Some tasks are redundant - Some functionality unnecessary . Your requirements define Your timetable . You want your supplier to stay in business . No worthwhile achievement is without pain Conclusions In summary, effective definition of the objectives and sound management of the implementation are at least as important as the selection of software and supplier. Even the best supplier can fail, given poor project control or ill defined objectives. Even the least able can deliver a good outcome if well directed and managed. "Some single mind must be master, else there will be no agreement in anything.." Abraham Lincoln 1864 "It's just what I asked for but it's not what I want.." Anonymous Software Client 1983 About Constellation Financing Systems Constellation Financing Systems is the premier software and service provider of lease and loan management systems to leading financial institutions, leasing companies, and equipment manufacturers. Media Inquiries Tiffany Thibeault TThibeault@constellationfs.com (289) 291-4999 Thu, 21 Feb 2008 10:57:34 GMT news.aspx?id=1 news.aspx?id=4 Out of the Red and into the Green: Transitioning your Company from Paper to Paperless Reed Clayton of Recombo Inc. We've all heard the popular phrase "don't re-invent the wheel." So when it's time to look at age old practices like processing paper documents, contracts and forms it's prudent to proceed with caution. The obvious environmental and cost savings in electronic agreement and digital signature products are many: Whether it's the overall reduction of a company's carbon footprint, the end of paper storage or the courier costs of shipping and processing paper around the world, more and more companies are seeing green initiatives as imperative. Electronic agreements and digital signatures are no longer the future; they are here and ready to ease the burden on many aspects of business communication. If change is on your radar screen, the key is to make it scalable, roll it out one business unit at a time and choose a system that doesn't require a monolithic 'big bang' implementation. The ability to start and end digital with electronic agreements and digital signatures allows organizations to minimize risk, eliminate mail, fax and courier, reduce administration costs and streamline processes. Federal laws combined with business needs have finally made digital signatures a legal and valid alternative to traditional pen and paper-based contracts. Step back for a minute and analyze the traditional business process. You've got a contract that needs to get from London to Cincinnati tomorrow. After you print it, sign it and insert it into the fax machine or wait for the courier, consider a few questions: . How do you know the status of your contract? . How do you know your end recipient or customer is sensitive to your timeline? Now, let's assume the contract is returned by the deadline. What do you do with it now? . Enter the data into back office systems? . Scan it, file it and hope you can find it again? At the end of this time, energy and cost-consuming process, how much did this all cost? According to IDC, US companies spend $25 to $35 billion processing, filing, storing and retrieving paper. Management of documents over their life cycle pushes that figure up to $100 billion a year. Once you receive the 'completed' document, keep your fingers crossed that there aren't any legal, audit, critical information or signatures missing, because when there are holes in your document trail the costs of settlement, litigation and lost goodwill can be enormous. In 1995, Coopers and Lybrand released a study that showed that the average office: . Makes 19 copies of each document; . Spends $250 recreating each lost document; . Spends $20 on labor for filing each document; . Loses 1 out of 20 documents; . Spends $120 searching for every misfiled document; and . Spends $25,000 to fill a 4-drawer file cabinet and $2,000 annually to maintain it! The next question one must ask is: what is that costing my business in today's dollars? At the end of the day, switching to a system that utilizes the company's existing IT infrastructure and harnesses the power of interactivity will save even more money because most digital signature platforms are scalable and flexible. Isn't that what the future of technology is all about? As companies are expected to do more with fewer resources, it's time to consider a solution that doesn't re-invent the wheel, but only refines it. Add to that the prospect of being green and reducing your overall carbon footprint and you've made the wheel turn a lot more efficiently. It's time to start digital, and end digital. About Constellation Financing Systems Constellation Financing Systems is the premier software and service provider of lease and loan management systems to leading financial institutions, leasing companies, and equipment manufacturers. Media Inquiries Tiffany Thibeault TThibeault@constellationfs.com (289) 291-4999 Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:09:13 GMT news.aspx?id=4