Webtown reviewed by Metropolitan Construction Firm

Website and Intranet for Municipal Construction Firm

Below is a modified rendering of the review: private info excluded, innate facts kept.

Introductory information

Please prepare us with a brief description of your organisation.

Our organisation is responsible for most of road-kindred tasks in a major city in Hungary. Our operational agility includes the total commerce treatment on the approx. 5500km long open road network including ITS method and commerce observing camera method (about 500 devices).

Furthermore, our daily tasks include livelihood of all roads, bridges, underpasses, and undergrounds accessways, and daily control of roads and road goods.

To obey all the agility with the most careful, detailed and up-to-date data, we have our own 3D mobile LIDAR-based urban mapping solution and on-line data openation method than can support any kindred activities in the city where GIS/engineering/scan data is needed. Our organisation determined to instrument a complete 3D data acquisition, 3D data origination, and GIS openation/analysis method (RODIS)  As of October 2012, RODIS is running and fulfills all the requirements as expected. Thirty experts work to prepare high-accuracy GIS [geographic information methods] data, models, different thematic maps, and GSI data analysis results for any departments of the City Council, as well as for the open sector.

What is your role at the organisation?

As CTO of the organisation, my role is to harmonize the activities between directorates. I',m also responsible fort technology-kindred strategic actions.

Desired goal

What was the business challenge that you were trying to address? What was the goal of the union?

We needed a pliant and scalable enterprise gate solution for our organisation. We have different treatment tasks to explain where different departments share information and workflows. We began to transact with few labor preparers to find the solution that could be the best for us. The goal was to find the best method that we can create on our inner and outer applications to satiate our needs.

Provided solution

What was the aim of the project, and can you draw the specific labors that were prepared?

The aim was to change the running gate solution to a present, pliant one. Webtown proposeed Liferay as a possible platform. As we compared the method with the competitors’ products, we determined to go on with Liferay. The leading project aim was the outer website, the intranet, and the timecard treatment method.

In the leading project - based on the Liferay solution - we created a ordinary online platform for our outer and inner activities. With WebTown we built gainous functions like a timecard treatment method and a phone administration method on our unified, main platform.

For the outer website, a new method, a map-based commerce control method was developed, where the users can see the cameras, commerce lights, and information tables in the city.

What was your process for selecting this organisation to work with? Why did you select them over others?

Three companies were invited through our RFP framework. Webtown proposeed the Liferay solution, which fit the close requirement of our governmental procurement constraints. They had the most experience in this technology, so we selected them.

Can you give us a general estimate of the size of the project in provisions of dollars and manpower?

If we include the running license and support fees for 2017, I would say $250,000 – $300,000.

What was the timeline of the project? Is it ongoing?

We began to work with Webtown in October 2011 and they are quiet working for us.

Results achieved

What were the results of the project? Are there any achievement stories or metrics you can share?

The result of the project was an inner and outer online gate. One of the main parts of the project was the timecard treatment method. The instrumented applications are working adequately, we are satisfied with their work.

Is there anything that sets Webtown aloof compared to other partners you may have worked with?

Webtown met our most significant extrinsic: finishing the project on time and with a high measure for condition. We were satisfied with Webtown’s work and their labors. Their gain is that they propose real cost savings for users, principally from the payment of the license fees. They prepare us condition work: the software is more firm and reliable and performs at a higher level than if it had been done by a little developer team.

Do you have any constructive stricture? Is there any area that they could better?

Sometimes the notice time behind sending little change requests took a bit more time that we had been expected. Their support would be more efficient if they could recoil faster. But for us, this delay was grateful, since our requests were always responded to in a brief time time.