Posts

Modernising legacy IT systems in a government agency can be challenging. Sometimes it becomes more challenging than initially expected. When our case management experts get asked about their experience with modernising legacy IT systems in the public sector, they admit that sometimes things are more complicated compared to projects in the private sector. In this blog post, we’ll discuss three major pain points in modernising government legacy IT systems. For that, we asked our experts to share their successful strategies in tackling the most common challenges they meet in public sector IT modernisation projects.

Related: How to write a good request for proposal for government case management system?

Modernising legacy case management systems with heavy technical debt

Over time, legacy systems can become complex, with many patches and workarounds added to maintain functionality. This can make upgrading or replacing the systems difficult and disrupt existing processes. Therefore technical debt is one of the most common pain points for government agencies seeking to update their IT legacy systems. Part of the reasons for that are:

  • The legacy case management system is often based on outdated technologies that are no longer supported or need to meet current security and compliance standards.
  • Legacy systems may have been built over many years, with numerous patches and workarounds added to maintain functionality.
  • It’s common for legacy systems to have integrations with other systems that are difficult to replace or that need to be updated as part of the modernisation project.
  • Modernising legacy systems can be expensive, requiring significant technological, staff, and resource investments. CIOs must consider the long-term cost of maintaining the systems over time.
  • Risk of failure: legacy systems may have vulnerabilities or weaknesses discovered over time, and CIOs must assess the risk of failure as part of the modernisation project.

As part of their strategy, CIOs must consider the complexity, cost, and risk of failure associated with technical debt when planning a modernisation project.

Related: Everything you should know about buying a public sector case management software off-the-shelf

Data migration when updating the existing case management platform

Migrating large amounts of data from legacy systems to new case management platforms can be a time-consuming and complex process, requiring specialised expertise and careful planning. It is a critical aspect of modernising a legacy system. Here are some key considerations for data migration that our experts shared:

  • Data quality: data migration can reveal issues with data quality, such as duplicates, missing values, and inconsistent formats. CIOs must ensure that the data is cleaned and standardised before migration to ensure the new system is accurate and usable.
  • Data mapping: Data mapping is the process of mapping data from the legacy system to the new platform, and it is critical to ensuring that the data is transferred accurately. CIOs must work with stakeholders to understand the data structure and relationships and to define the mapping rules.
  • Data security: Data migration can be sensitive, especially in a regulatory agency. CIOs must ensure that data is protected and that security measures are in place to prevent unauthorised access or theft.
  • Data archiving: Legacy systems may contain historical data that is no longer needed for daily operations, but that must be retained for compliance purposes. CIOs must consider data archiving options to ensure that the data is preserved and accessible.
  • Data testing: Data migration is a complex process. CIOs must conduct thorough testing to ensure that the data is transferred accurately and that the new system is functioning as expected.

CIOs must carefully plan and execute the migration to ensure that data is protected, accurate, and accessible. Internal teams can ensure a successful data migration and a modern, efficient case management system by working with stakeholders and following best practices.

Resistance to change

Resistance to change can be a common challenge when modernising a legacy IT system for inspection management processes, as staff may be familiar with the existing system and may be wary of new technology. Here are some strategies that our experts recommend to CIOs to tackle resistance to change:

  • Communication: Clear and effective communication is key to managing resistance to change. CIOs should involve staff early in the modernisation process and keep them informed about the benefits and goals of the project. This can help to build trust and reduce anxiety about change.
  • Providing training on the new system can help staff feel confident and prepared for the transition. CIOs should consider offering training sessions and resources that allow staff to learn at their own pace.
  • Engaging staff in the modernisation process can help build buy-in and reduce resistance. CIOs should solicit feedback and ideas from staff and involve them in testing and validation activities.

A modular and phased approach to modernisation can help manage resistance by allowing staff to adjust gradually to change. CIOs should break the modernisation project into smaller, manageable components and implement them incrementally.


 

Case study: Why the phased approach of adopting an inspection management software is a good tactic?

Read it to understand:

    • The advantages of modular digital transformation
    • The vital architectural practices and technologies that enable modular transformation
    • How a regulatory agency in the UK is benefitting from a modular approach with Canalix.


Emphasising the benefits of the new system can help reduce resistance. CIOs should highlight the benefits for staff, such as increased efficiency, improved functionality, and a better user experience.

In conclusion, managing resistance to change is an important aspect of modernising a legacy IT system and government case management software. CIOs should take a proactive approach to communication, training, and engagement to build buy-in and ensure a smooth transition. By involving staff and emphasising the new system’s benefits, CIOs can overcome resistance and deliver a successful modernisation project.

Ask us more about Canalix, a case management system for government agencies:

When writing an RFP for inspection management software, it is important to clearly outline your organisation’s specific needs and goals for the software, as well as any specific requirements or features. To make your system future-proof, you should include an innovation section outlining your organisation’s interest in cutting-edge technology or new approaches to inspection services.

Unfortunately, most requests for proposals for a government case management system don‘t account for any of these possibilities and opportunities. Too often, these RFPs present little opportunity for innovation or even improvement. Instead, they drill down into technical requirements at extreme detail levels, resulting in a document that often does little to help differentiate vendors. The result: a process that is well suited to replicate paper- or DOS-based procedures but not to help bring a court into the future.

Can a flawed RFP process lead to adopting a bad case management system?

To answer this question, first we need to define what a good case management system is.

A good case management system for inspections might have the following characteristics:


  • Flexibility, allowing it to be adapted to the unique needs of different types of inspections and inspection agencies
  • Robust reporting and analytics capabilities, making it easy to track and analyse inspection data
  • Integration with other systems, such as document management or data analysis tools
  • User-friendly interface, making it easy for inspectors to navigate and use the system effectively
  • Scalability, allowing it to handle increasing volumes of inspections and data
  • Strong security features, protecting sensitive inspection data from breaches
  • Compliance with relevant regulations and legal requirements
  • Mobile accessibility and offline capability
  • Automated workflows, electronic signatures, and electronic submissions

inspection services


A bad case management system for inspections, on the other hand, might have the following characteristics:

  • Lack of flexibility makes it difficult to adapt to the unique needs of different inspections or inspection agencies.
  • Limited reporting and analytics capabilities, making it difficult to track and analyse inspection data.
  • Lack of integration with other systems, such as document management or data analysis tools
  • A poor user interface makes it difficult for inspectors to navigate and use the system effectively.
  • Limited scalability, making it difficult to handle increasing volumes of inspections and data.
  • Security vulnerabilities, exposing sensitive inspection data to risk of breaches

It’s important to note that the specific requirements for a good case management system will vary depending on the nature of the inspections, the size of the organisation, and the specific goals and needs of the inspection agency. If a flawed RFP (request-for-proposals) process impacts the decision making around choosing a new case management system, then that might lead to adopting a bad case management system that won’t be future proof. Which leaves us with another question. Should government agencies develop their own case management systems and not rely on vendors?


Should government agencies develop their own case management systems?

In the past, it‘s been largely up to government agencies to build their own technology. Now, government structures such as regulators and courts can take advantage of the experience and skills of accomplished technologists who specialise in different departments, e.g. regulatory case management, court case management, etc. These experts, for example, can bring a regulator a modern CMS that connects the various stakeholders of the regulatory enforcement process and helps the agency better plan inspection services and the big pool of resources that’s attached to them.

Of course, a regulator still needs to write an RFP to choose experts who can provide the CMS that best fits the agency’s needs. In this piece, the experts of Canalix – inspection management software and regulatory case management system – will offer ideas to help regulatory agencies to write an RFP that do just that.

Where to start from? The current state of the CMS system.

A Request for Proposal (RFP) should give vendors detailed information about the current state of a regulatory case management system’s technology for several reasons:

  1. It helps vendors understand the current technology landscape of the organisation. This will enable them to identify areas of improvement and tailor their solutions to the specific needs of the regulatory body.
  2. It can help vendors identify any potential integration issues. Suppose the regulatory body already has a case management system in place. Vendors need to know their capabilities and limitations to understand if their solution can be integrated with the existing system without causing disruptions.
  3. It can help vendors understand the scope of the project. If vendors know the system’s current state, they can better estimate the resources required to implement their solution.
  4. It can help vendors understand the organisation’s budget. By knowing the current system, vendors can better estimate the costs associated with the implementation of their solution, and this will help the regulatory body to make more informed decisions.
  5. It can help vendors understand the organisation’s priorities. Knowing the system’s current state will give vendors an idea of the organisation’s priorities, which will help them tailor their solutions to better meet the organisation’s needs.

In summary, providing vendors with detailed information about the current state of a regulatory case management system‘s technology in an RFP can help vendors understand the organisation’s needs and priorities, tailor their solutions to meet those needs, and provide accurate cost estimates. This will help the regulatory body to select a vendor and solution that best fits their needs, budget, and priorities.

Related: Improving resource efficiency in regulatory inspections: Ultimate Guide for 2023


What valuable information a good written RFP will give to a vendor?

In addition to the considerations listed above, an effective RFP will explain the following:

• The biggest challenges related to communications or data that the regulator has faced in the past five years
• New concerns that the regulator expects to become significant during the next five years
• The proposed lifetime of the new system
• The regulator’s ability and willingness to change its business processes to increase efficiency
• The inspection caseload and case lag
• The regulator’s data-entry challenges
• The technologies used by current employees to help run inspections efficiently
• Is the regulatory agency looking for a single vendor to fulfil a contract, or would the court consider multiple vendors to develop different modules (modular digital transformation)?


Frequently asked question on choosing a government case management systems

The Canalix experts shared several frequently asked technical questions that they get asked from government agency consultants and strategists, including:


  1. What types of data can be stored and tracked in the system?
  2. How are data security and privacy handled in the system?
  3. How does the system handle reporting and analytics?
  4. Can the system integrate with other systems, such as document management or data analysis tools?
  5. What are the system’s scalability and flexibility?
  6. Can the system handle automated workflows and electronic signatures?
  7. Is the system mobile accessible and offline-capable?
  8. Is the system compliant with relevant regulations and legal requirements?
  9. How is the system updated and maintained?
  10. What kind of support and training is available for the system?
digitalised inspection platform saas

Screenshot from the self-inspection software portal developed by Canalix.

 


If you’re a consultant or a strategist looking for a government case management system vendor, asking these questions will help you better understand the system’s capabilities and limitations and how well it will meet your organisation’s specific needs. It’s important to remember that the specific requirements for a good case management system will vary depending on the nature of the inspections, the size of the organisation, and the specific goals and needs of the inspection agency.


It’s important to choose a future-proof case management system because it will help to ensure that your organisation’s needs are met now and in the future. A future-proof system will be able to adapt to changing requirements, will support the growth of the organisation and will be able to integrate with new technologies and tools. This will help to ensure that your organisation can continue to operate efficiently and effectively, now and in the future.