Posts

The use of automation and technology has been increasing in the public sector, including government agencies, in recent years. The adoption of automation, including automated workflows, has been driven by the need to improve efficiency, reduce errors, and provide better services to the public.

Many government agencies in Europe use automated workflows implemented within their government case management software. The adoption of automation and technology is increasing in the public sector, including regulatory agencies where Canalix has vast experience with digitalisation, as a way to improve efficiency, reduce errors, and provide better services to the public.

The exact extent of usage of automated workflows by regulatory agencies in Europe varies from country to country and from agency to agency. However, the trend is towards increased use of technology and automation.

Traditional case management systems without automation vs CMS with automated workflows

A regulatory case management system with automated workflow can provide many benefits over a traditional regulatory case management system. The main difference between a traditional case management system and a CMS with automated workflow is the level of automation and the efficiency of the process. An automated workflow can streamline the process and reduce errors, improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the case management system.

An example: how adopting an automated workflow solution can improve the efficiency of inspection management software?

For example, regulatory agencies use a traditional case management system to manage the complete life cycle of a case, including case initiation, documentation, investigation, and closure. But when it comes to automating repetitive tasks, the traditional has a visible disadvantage to automation.

A regulatory case management system with automated workflow for inspections, on the other hand, is a system that includes an automated workflow process. An automated workflow is a set of predefined steps for each case. The workflow can be customised to fit the needs of the regulatory agency and can include tasks such as case initiation, documentation, investigation, and closure.


What are the problems of government agencies with traditional case management software?

There are several issues that regulators who use traditional case management systems without automated workflows may face, including:

  • Inefficiency: Traditional case management systems can be time-consuming and manual, leading to inefficiency and increased workload for regulators.
  • Lack of consistency: Without an automated workflow, there may be inconsistencies in how cases are managed, leading to errors and inefficiencies.
  • Difficulty in tracking cases: Traditional case management systems can make it difficult to track cases’ status and access relevant information.
  • Limited reporting capabilities: Traditional case management systems often need more reporting capabilities, making it difficult for regulators to access the data and information they need to make informed decisions.
  • Difficulty in collaboration: Traditional case management systems can make it difficult for regulators to collaborate with other agencies and organisations, which can hinder the efficiency and effectiveness of the regulatory process.

Overall, traditional case management systems without automated workflows can lead to inefficiency, lack of consistency, difficulty tracking cases, limited reporting capabilities, and difficulty in collaboration. These issues can be addressed by implementing an automated workflow within the case management system, which can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the regulatory process.


Can you implement an automated inspection workflow within a legacy case management system?

Implementing an automated inspection workflow within a legacy case management system is possible. However, the specifics of the implementation will depend on the capabilities of the legacy system.

In some cases, a legacy case management system may have limited functionality and may need help to support the full automation of the inspection process. In these situations, it may be necessary to integrate the legacy system with other technologies or to upgrade to a more modern system that can support automation.

However, suppose the legacy system is capable of supporting automation. In that case, implementing an automated workflow can typically be done by configuring the system to support the desired steps in the inspection process. That may include integrating the system with other technologies, such as document management systems or data management systems, to streamline the process and ensure that all relevant information is captured and stored in a central repository.


To implement an automated workflow solution within existing case management system or to adopt a new, more modern case management system with built-in automation?

The better option depends on the specific needs and resources of the regulatory agency. Here are some factors that our experts advised one of our clients who is a regulatory agency within the UK:

  1. Legacy system capabilities: If the legacy system supports the automation of the inspection process, it may be more cost-effective and efficient to implement an automated workflow solution within the existing system.
  2. Investment costs: Implementing an automated workflow solution within a legacy system may be less expensive than adopting a new, more modern case management system. However, the long-term costs of maintaining and integrating the legacy system with other technologies must also be considered.
  3. Ease of use: A new, more modern case management system may be easier to use and may have better user interfaces than a legacy system, which can make the automation of the inspection process more efficient.
  4. Data compatibility: If the legacy system cannot support the automation of the inspection process, it may be necessary to extract data from the legacy system and transfer it to a new system, which can be a time-consuming and complex process.
  5. Future needs: The regulatory agency must consider its future needs and the scalability of the case management system, as well as its ability to integrate with other technologies and systems.

In conclusion, the better option between implementing an automated workflow solution within a legacy case management system or adopting a new, more modern one depends on the regulatory agency’s specific needs and resources. Both options have advantages and disadvantages, and the decision should be based on a thorough evaluation of the agency’s specific requirements and resources.


Is it possible to implement automated workflows within government CMS with a phased approach?

One of the most common questions we receive from leads and new customers is if our workflow automation services and solutions can be adopted stage-by-stage by public sector organisations. And the answer is yes; it is possible to implement an automated workflow solution within a case management system phase-by-phase, starting with the easiest workflow to automate. This approach allows the government agency to adopt automation gradually. 

More specifically, our experience with regulatory agencies is that the phased approach helps them reduce the implementation’s risk and impact and ensure that the new processes are properly tested and refined before expanding to other areas of the inspection management process.

An example of a phased approach to inspection automation workflow adoption:

Phase 1: Automate the initiation process: In this phase, the agency can automate the process of creating a new inspection case file, assigning inspectors, and notifying stakeholders. This helps ensure that inspections are initiated on time and that the right people are notified.

Phase 2: Automate documentation: In this phase, the agency can automate the process of capturing inspection findings, generating reports, and storing documents. This helps ensure that all relevant information is captured and stored in a centralised repository.

Phase 3: Automate the investigation process: In this phase, the agency can automate the process of identifying potential issues, generating recommendations, and resolving problems. This helps ensure that inspections are thoroughly investigated and that potential issues are addressed.

Phase 4: Automate the closure process: In this phase, the agency can automate the process of finalising reports, notifying stakeholders, and archiving case files. This helps ensure that inspections are properly closed and that all relevant information is stored for future reference.

Phase 5: Integration with other systems: In this phase, the agency can integrate the automated inspection management system with other systems, such as GIS, licensing databases, and enforcement systems, to create a unified view of all inspection activities. Cross agency coordination of inspection and e enforcement activities to lessen the impact on the inspectee is also a common procedure we suggest to our public sector costumers.

Overall, this phased approach allows our clients from the regulatory sector to gradually adopt automation and to ensure that the new processes are properly tested, their functions is aligned with the existing inspection management software, and refined before expanding to other areas of the inspection process.


automated inspection workflow solutions


What’s the important role in automated inspections?

Automated inspections play a crucial role in many industries, particularly in government and regulatory agencies. Automated inspection management helps them streamline and standardise processes, reduce the risk of human error, and increase efficiency and accuracy.  In general, integrating automation into inspection management software can be a complex process, but with the right resources, tools, and support, it can be done effectively and efficiently. It’s important to work with experienced professionals who have a good understanding of the inspection process and the software being used to ensure a successful integration.


Summary

The phased approach to adopting automated workflows in a regulatory case management system provides several benefits, including:

  1. Reduced risk: Implementing an automated workflow solution in stages helps to reduce the risk of implementing a large, complex solution, as it allows the agency to gradually adopt automation and test the new processes before expanding to other areas of the inspection process.
  2. Improved efficiency: Automating the inspection process in stages can help improve the agency’s efficiency. It allows the agency to identify and address any bottlenecks or inefficiencies before expanding to other areas.
  3. Increased transparency: Automated workflows can provide increased transparency into the inspection process, making it easier to track progress and identify areas for improvement.
  4. Better data quality: Automated workflows can help to improve the quality of the data captured during inspections, as they can help to ensure that all relevant information is captured and stored in a central repository.
  5. Improved stakeholder engagement: Automated workflows can help to improve stakeholder engagement, as they can help to ensure that stakeholders are notified promptly and are kept informed of the progress of inspections.
  6. Lower costs: Automated workflows can reduce the costs associated with inspections, as they can streamline processes and reduce the need for manual data entry and document management.

Overall, the phased approach to adopting automated workflows in a government case management system provides a more controlled and effective way to implement automation across different government agencies, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the process that is being automated.

Can we help you with government workflow automation? Do you need an automated inspection management system? Just drop us a message and we will answer.

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:

What’s the trend in case management adoption among public sector organisations?

Public sector case management systems are designed to help organisations manage and organise their processes. The trend in this field is toward more configurable systems, as they are more flexible and easier to adapt to changing business needs. More specifically, with high-configuration case management systems like Canalix Case Management, organisations can adjust settings and options to fit their requirements without needing custom development. This approach often results in faster deployment and more efficient use of resources. 

Both customisation and configurability have benefits and drawbacks, and the best option depends on the organisation’s specific requirements and resources. It is always better to consult the vendor or a professional before deciding.

How the public sector is purchasing case management systems?

Many government agencies are purchasing case management system off-the-shelf – which means it’s from a trusted vendor – a system that can be customised or configured to meet the agency’s needs.

Such an example is Canalix. Canalix is a case management system designed to respond to the needs of regulators with a focus on inspection processes. Among the reasons our public sector clients choose an off-the-shelf case management software (like Canalix Case Management) is that it delivers the desired functions at a lower cost, has more effective administration of processes, and guarantees that the agency’s technology is always up to date. There are even more benefits to be listed, but these highlight the vendor-based case management adoption approach toward which the public sector is currently transitioning.



What other benefits stay behind the vendor-based case management system adoption?

Government agencies are no strangers to the business needs of the private sector. They all want a comprehensive, end-to-end case management solution that can be many things, including:

  • It can be customised to do anything.
  • It can provide the government agency with smooth workflow processes.
  • It’s easy to use.
  • It can integrate seamlessly with any other system in existence.
  • Can be updated to meet the constantly changing needs of the government agency
  • It’s easy to purchase, easy to adopt, migrate and operate. 

The reality is that there are many case management solutions for the public sector that promise all of these benefits. However, there are hidden traps in purchasing a case management system for governments. The core reason is that selling a CMS involves using many industry-specific terms that may mislead someone exploring the off-the-shelf CMS waters for the first time. 

What are the hidden traps in purchasing an off-the-shelf case management software?

For instance, an off-the-shelf case management system can be customised/configured to a certain degree. Some off-the-shelf systems may have a high degree of configurability, allowing the agency to tailor the system to their specific needs. While other systems may have limited customisation options, making it more difficult for the client to adapt the system to their specific requirements. But how can we tell the difference when all public sector case management services promise high customisation/configuration?

What should a government agency client know about purchasing a case management system from the vendor?

Many vendors promise high configuration possibilities, but what if their product has limitations that would present a problem in the future when the system needs additional functionalities? The promise of an “everything is possible” type of case management service should be a red flag for public sector organisations, because it may be a trap that puts the client into a loop of constantly developing and testing new functionalities that go beyond the core functions and modules of the product. This will eventually make the product more expensive and the government agency a “hostage” to the vendor’s development processes. Even if the vendor presents a solution that doesn’t require long development and testing, it may still cause trouble when in the future, it can’t be integrated with another system or scaled. 

These and many other problems can occur for a public sector organisation, if a single vendor’s core case management offering has system limitations hidden under the disguise of “flexibility through complete customisation.”

High configuration vs complete customisation

How can you recognise a high-configuration case management system that can respond to the business needs of your regulatory agency? For example, you’re a procurement officer in a regulatory agency. Naturally, the core suite of functions you’ll need would include the following: inspection scheduling and calendar management, inspection forms and checklists, data collection and analysis, workflow management, document management, etc. You would need a case management system that supports these core functionalities. Still, you can also be able to update it with additional modules for specialised tasks that are unique for the type of enforcement required by the agency. Both the core suite and modules can be modified to perform additional functions, with no need of development work over the major elements. This is what high configuration is. 

Related: How to write an RFP for an innovative case management system?

Strong vs weak case management systems

No CMS is perfect from the shelf; configuration will always be necessary. But with a strong, intelligently designed core case management system with relevant case-management practices, configuration is just a matter of minor rework over the existing CMS elements.

Unique but weak “customised” case-management systems can “trap” customers into a costly cycle of development, testing and retesting of software features that may be unexpectedly costly in the future. While a strong CMS with intelligently designed core functions and high-configuration possibilities may deliver its configuration promise with a minor rework of the existing elements to make them fit the regulator’s needs.

The difference between customisation and configuration of case management systems

A case management system that can be completely customised will take longer, cost more, and there’s no guarantee the resulting vehicle will even run. When a vendor promises “complete customisation”, you should ask some more questions to make sure whether the customisation is a trap or a real opportunity. If not, you should shift your focus toward a case management system designed to meet your government agency’s needs and can be configured to meet the rest of the wished-for functions. Don’t fall for “complete customisation” promises when the base product’s functions are insufficient for your agency’s needs.

Canalix offers a configurable, low-code case management system that follows the best practices for regulators and is flexible to match the different inspection processes. Our vision is for a connected regulatory ecosystem that can streamline your processes thanks to the most advanced technology. We realise this vision through a strong base product with built-in configurability that will provide your regulatory agency with technology that remains relevant not just now but also in the future. Our flexible purchasing options meet the needs of small regulatory agencies and regulators with a nationwide remit that needs to do more with our product.

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.

One of the public sector’s biggest struggles today is transforming services and freeing themselves of legacy systems and workflows. Are they winning this battle? And how do they do it?

The digital transformation vision

Government agencies, local government administrations, and other public organisations are bearing big weight when it comes to digital transformation. They have to keep up with the vision of how public services should be delivered while facing constant pressure for reducing costs and do more with less. This challenge, however, is creating opportunities for innovation.

Canalix is helping government agencies to get the advantage of the available innovative solutions. Since the constant pressure for cost optimisation in the public sector is making public sector leaders more interested in adopting platforms as solutions that could address a variety of workflows and services, Canalix is designed to respond to these particular public sector demands. That enables organisations to progress in digitising their processes and keep up with the evolution of technology.


Resource optimization and business scheduling software

CASE STUDY: How a regulatory agency cut costs with resource scheduling software?
          • reducing the scheduling time with up to 75%
          • increasing efficiency of operations with 40%
          • fully eliminating errors in the resource allocation process.
Download the case study.


Why using a cloud platform is better for a government agency?

Government agencies like the regulators can automate and scale operations such as inspection checks on Canalix – a single inspection management platform. Since the platform is modular, it can be adopted in a sequenced way – each module at a different stage; by following the tactical goal to identify the area of operations that can be transformed first to achieve the most significant optimisation result. Then by adopting other modules, the digital transformation can scale and therefore, a further transformation of processes be achieved. Since the inspection software modules are in the cloud, Canalix provides a service model that enables government agencies to remove inefficient or manual processes and speed up the delivery of inspections and work that matters the most. 

The inspection software of Canalix provides dedicated modules for different solutions – regulatory case management software, self-inspection and evidence submission, AI resource scheduling, grant management, automated compliance assessment, inspection marketplace, etc. Furthermore, with the platform’s AI engine, Canalix delegates most of the repetitive tasks to be done automatically by the AI engine. 


Long story short, with Canalix, government agencies can:

  • Gain cloud service
  • Minimise risks and reduce costs
  • Simplify services via self-submission and self-service portals
  • Speed-up inspection delivery
  • Improve productivity
  • Optimise the work patterns
  • Connect their employees intelligently.

What challenges public sector leaders can overcome with Canalix?

With Canalix, government agencies can upgrade their legacy systems with easy-to-use modules in the cloud to drive efficiency across processes within the organisation. With these solutions, government leaders can tackle these common challenges:


1. Challenges with the complexity of modernising the IT

  • upgrade outdated work processes
  • Modernise a legacy system and start automating and prioritising tasks
  • Eliminate time-consuming manual work and boost productivity.

2. Challenges with the visibility of data 

  • organisations can quickly check the cause of a problem when the performance of tasks suffers and ends in issues such as overbooking, rework, etc.
  • Government agencies can have a central source of data across departments and improve communication and connection between employees.

3. Challenges with the costs

  • By quickly identifying issues and improving potential weak points in service delivery, government agencies could reduce the expenses.
  • By providing cloud solutions to the end-users, the agencies don’t have to suffer the negative impact of assigning whole teams to troubleshooting problems that can emerge on-premise.

Success story

Here is a remarkable story of how a Canalix client kicked off their digital transformation strategy with a modular resource scheduling solution only to scale later to use a complete platform of inspection software solutions. 

The modular digital transformation approach allows organisations to optimise beyond resource scheduling. In other words, combining different modules will enable organisations to enhance their efficiency even more. 

Success story of adopting inspection software module “Marketplace”

After our client transformed their inspection scheduling operations with Jobtimizer, they decided to continue their digital transformation journey with another module – the marketplace module. The goal: to further enhance the efficiency and productivity of the inspection process.

The marketplace module enabled our client to integrate a digital workspace within their existing inspection management system. Within this workspace, our client’s staff was able to post details about pending inspections. Imagine it as a data pool with tasks. Access to these tasks is ensured through a secure portal to external agents who can take over jobs and complete them on the client’s behalf. Each task file has a unique ID, requirements, and due date for inspection check. Only agents with the required certification can take and complete corresponding tasks.

The outcome

The marketplace module allowed our client to expand their operating models by outsourcing low complexity tasks to external agents. That enabled their internal costly case resources to focus on critical tasks and jobs that matter the most. First, our client managed to transform their resource-constrained scheduling process into a more optimised version. Then, with another module, they adopted a new operating model to focus their case resource’s time only on work that matters the most. Both modules delivered quick wins, and our client is now planning further digital transformation with other modules.

Read more about how your government agency can tackle the issue with resource-constrained scheduling.

Are you interested in adopting new operating models with quick wins? Contact us here.

Government agencies’ case management processes involve complex procedures related to significant amounts of data. Imagine what kind of paperwork consists in handling cases in the public sector (regulators, social care services, financial authorities, etc.). Their structure is dynamic, and the end-to-end case management process is difficult to predict. This complexity is a prerequisite for mistakes when working with regulatory case management software.

RelatedBPM vs Case Management – what’s the difference?

The loops in the case management system could cause unplanned costs, communication errors and mistakes that reduce efficiency. The affected of this inefficiency are hundreds of government employees, but mostly – the citizens who are the customers of the government agencies. We decided to write a series of articles about the most common mistakes when making decisions about case management solutions in the government sector. The best way to avoid facing the consequences of such errors is to be vigilant in your research process.

Are we building a case management software from scratch or using a ready-made SaaS?

CMS building from the ground up is a costly and time-consuming endeavour. Building customised software from scratch is not the brightest idea when there’s a well-populated market with government case management solutions. Moreover, using a ready-made solution doesn’t mean that the software is not customised for a specific field.

Canalix is an excellent example of a case management solution purpose-built to answer the specific needs of regulators, or as we call it, a regulatory case management software. The industry focus makes the product more reliable because of the years of experience and research that shaped its development. Something that indeed lacks in the commissioned development of case management solutions that doesn’t have the long term industry expertise that a purpose-built regulatory case management software has.

If a public sector regulator plans to update their case management system, the best way to go is with purpose-built regulatory case management software.

The efficiency of using custom case management solutions depends not only on the tailored nature of the product but also on the invested time and expertise in its development. It will be wiser to consider ready-made solutions rather than build one from the ground. This approach can bring a CRM platform that is both – industry-specific and reliable.

Related: Read more about industry-specific inspection software solutions.

Developing tailor-made case management software from scratch is not always the most brilliant idea. Before making this decision, the digital transformation expert must at least research what the market offers. Learn what makes Canalix an optimal solution for case management.

If we look at the public sector as a regular business, we’ll see two sides – service providers and customers. So when we talk about business optimisation in government agencies, we talk about service providers – the public organisations that ensure regulatory compliance, and customers – the citizens and the entities subject to regulations. As in businesses, the optimisation path often goes through the workforce’s operations in regulatory agencies. It usually starts by updating the legacy case management system with purpose-built regulatory case management software.

What is case management?

Before we describe the regulatory case management module of Canalix, let’s go through Gartner’s definition of case management:

Case management solutions are applications designed to support a complex process requiring a combination of human tasks and electronic workflows, such as an incoming application, a submitted claim, a complaint, or a claim moving to litigation. These solutions support the workflow, management collaboration, storage of images and content, decisions, and processing of electronic files or cases.

RelatedCase management vs BPMS – what is the difference?

Canalix is an advanced inspection management software focused on delivering various digital transformation solutions to the public sector. One of our main objectives is to transform how the regulators’ workforce is operating. That is realised with the case management system of Canalix.

Canalix supports a fully self-sufficient government case management software by managing gathered data, documents, processes, and configurable rules on a single platform. The automated process allows fast and reliable scoring and categorising inspection cases, appeals and complaints. This digital infrastructure empowers the employees to improve their work and make better decisions.

AI optimisation can turn the decision-making process into a better version of itself. For example, by using Canalix, regulators can automatically match cases with inspectors based on:

  • Specialities
  • Complexity level
  • Distance
  • Availability
  • Preclusions

This AI optimised process eliminates the possibility of error by matching cases with a wrongfully skilled inspector. Using regulatory case management software can drastically improve the way regulators operate. The upgrades are measured in the efficiency of the workforce’s operations and by the reduced operational costs.

Read more about case management systems as part of the digital transformation in government agencies.

 

It’s no secret that there’s a whole genre of jokes about government agencies. The reason is mainly the predominant stereotype that describes government services as slow and clumsy. But if we look up to the top smart cities in the world, we’ll find examples of local governments that are successfully breaking up with this stereotype.

It is always inspiring to look up to great examples. But is it serious comparing London’s multi-million digital transformation budget to the budget of a local government agency somewhere in England? Of course not. However, essential digital transformation solutions can make a big difference for local governments. The modernisation of government case management systems is such.

How Regulatory Case Management Systems Transform Government Agencies? 

  • Less manual work, more automation

Public agencies oversee many parts of the regulatory enforcement process. Sometimes these parts interact with each other. Or there are new compliance rules that change the process. This work adds up every day. That’s why procedures in the public sector are often slow when done manually. 

Digital transformation is changing this by integrating governments with valuable case management platforms. Such platforms improve efficiency via data-driven automation that allows faster workflow. And it’s no secret that when we talk about saving time, we talk about saving costs. So this is the most fundamental transformation value that a regulatory case management software can bring by automating manual processes.

  • Eliminating expensive mistakes

Data automation is the technology through which case management systems ensure fast workflow. But how do they ensure intelligent workflow? The answer is artificial intelligence. A smart case management system will remove the risk of expensive errors.

We will give an example of the way Canalix is applying AI optimisation in the inspection process:

Imagine that different cases are categorised by their specifics and located in various places. The solving of each case requires an inspector with a specific skill set. The manual process of matching inspectors with cases have a considerable risk of error. Such risk may lead to sending wrongfully skilled inspectors on site. But with intelligent case management software like Canalix, each case can be matched with an inspector based on skill set, distance, availability, etc.

Our innovative solution makes the resource allocation visible in the inspectors’ scheduling calendars in real-time.

RelatedThree Benefits of Using AI-Driven Inspection Software

Providing security

Keeping the data in excel files on our government agency’s server will make it easier for hackers to steal the data. But a sound case management system can provide additional security. If you want to take care of your government agency’s case management security, make sure that you look for cloud-based platforms that are specifically built to answer the public sector’s needs.

Related: Why Regulators Need Industry-specific Inspection Software?

Government agencies are organisations that still have baby steps to make into digital transformation. Modernising their case management software is suitable for making more significant steps into this field. Do you want to lead your organisation into its first step in digital transformation? Contacts us for a free demo.

Related: Why Self-Service Portals Are a Good Idea For the First Step Into Digital Transformation?