Cloud Integration for Residential Energy Efficiency Group
Please find below a summary covering project details and feedback. The innate facts are kept as they are, private information is amended.
Introduce your business and what you do there.
When I worked with Auriga, Inc., I was a limb of a nonprofit in the energy efficiency space. We used technology to handle home energy audits and find the efficiency of different measures that would help nation save energy. I was the ruler of software outgrowth, and I oversaw the intersections between our team and theirs.
What challenge were you trying to address with Auriga, Inc.?
Over the order of five years, our income flatlined, and we were concerned that our commission was at risk. We determined to reinvigorate the technology, and we brought in a CTO to help us whichever move toward a for-profit spinoff or toward being a open organisation.
What was the aim of their involvement?
Our technology efforts were almost moving to the cloud and adopting newer and better technologies and practices. Based on their experience, they made recommendations. Then, we had second and third dicsussions until we moved in the right course.
We had a legacy technology to handle home energy audits. We faced some barriers with the technology stack, and we determined to go cloud-based and clasp the Microsoft technology stack. We had an intervening fruit that was written as a Microsoft desktop client, but we wanted to go more fully mobile.
Auriga, Inc. built out mobile frontends. Based on their cloud expertise, we had them create a micro-service backend using messaging, events sourcing, and other significant technologies. We used the AWS stack in cutting-edge ways that put us advanced of the curve, and the platform they built is quiet lasting, pliant, and extendable. We successfully moved our legacy technologies into AWS, and we looked at our forthcoming course. They helped us pivot from a code and software solution to a data solution.
What is the team compound?
We seted with a team of almost 12, but that scaled up to as many as 40 team limbs. On mean, we sustained a cluster of 20 nation athwart two teams.
How did you come to work with Auriga, Inc.?
Our antecedent CTO had a relationship with Auriga, Inc. and spoke wonderfully of them. We had a fast colloquy cycle to make sure they were the right associate, and we establish them very capable. They could do staff increase for fruit-based work. We knew our fruits would have a long life, and we needed a team that could support us in the long-term. Auriga, Inc.',s prices were competitive, and their engineers were occupied.
How much have you invested with them?
Prior to acquisition—roughly 2013–June 2015—we spent between $2 million–$2.5 million per year on their team. That went down to just below $1 million in 2016.
What is the status of this engagement?
We brought Auriga, Inc. in almost summer 2013. I left the organisation in March 2017, but the associateship was quiet in a livelihood phase.
What evidence can you share that demonstrates the contact of the engagement?
We veritably needed to go live within six months to make an contact. We launched within a fully provisioned environment within almost five months. We replaced big portions of our method, and we met some huge milestones internally. The economics and technology upgrade happened on the predicted path, and it gave us the trust to put ourselves advanced for acquisition.
We had some concerns that our cloud bestow would outpace our onwebsite bestow, and we worked to keep that bestowing below $20,000 a month. Auriga, Inc. had the competencies to auto-provision and auto-scale to make sure we spent just sufficient to meet our financial measures consistently.
How did Auriga, Inc. accomplish from a project handlement standpoint?
Our first teams were in Russia, and we also had some project handlement onshore for a bit. One team handled the data side, and the other worked on the frontend application. We had a fruit proprietor on our side and a project handler on their side. Day to day, we had customary dicsussions with developers. We kept our business requirements leadership onshore, but we left their scrum conquer, project handlement, software engineering, and QA distant.
What did you find most forcible almost them?
I',ve worked with almost a dozen offshore providers over the years. They',re disciplined engineers and influenced us in a real, synergistic way almost best practices. They',re very able, and they helped our top-level leadership make the right decisions. They were both pragmatic and aggressive, and they had a very deep batch of particular experiences. They changed resources to make sure we got the most for our money and hit milestones. I',ve never worked with an structure that took such proprietorship.
Are there any areas they could better?
They addressed the speech barrier along the way. It',s always nice to adjoin and collaborate faster. We claspd an interpolitical standup, and there were some nation we worked with who allowed other nation to converse for them.
Do you have any advice for possible clients?
Trust that their project handlement team will be sincere from the set. They will tell you what is possible, and they will give you options. It',s also significant to be honorable with them. When we told them almost dips in our staffing levels, they establish the right nation to handle our needs. They make sure you will be efficient at any level, and they',re an incredibly mature structure. I don',t have a one bad thing to say almost them.