Alternative to the tool chain
An alternative to helpdesk plus ERP plus accounting
The most common setup in a system house is not a piece of software but a chain: a helpdesk (Jira Service Management or Zammad, say), a merchandise management system and accounting handled by the tax practice - joined together by exports, spreadsheets and people. IDA replaces the chain with one system and keeps the interface to the practice.
Fair play: Each of those tools is good in itself. What gets expensive is not the software but the transfer between them.
The tool chain and IDA compared
| Helpdesk + ERP + accounting | IDA | |
|---|---|---|
| Number of systems | Three systems plus spreadsheets in between | One system, one state of the data |
| From ticket to invoice | Export the time, enter it in the ERP, write the document | The ticket becomes an order, and from there the delivery note and the invoice - nothing retyped |
| Maintenance contracts | The quota in a spreadsheet, billing by hand | Budget on the contract, consumption from time tracking, billing automatic |
| Accounting | The tax practice stays - the question is how documents get there | DATEV posting batch and document images from IDA; the practice carries on as before |
| Cost | Three licences plus interface upkeep plus working time | One price, all functions included |
| Source of error | Every transfer is a place where something gets lost | No transfer, no second state of the data |
Stated to the best of our knowledge; the vendors current information is what counts.
Which fits whom?
When separate tools are the right answer
Separate tools make sense when one area is genuinely special - an ERP with its own manufacturing, say, or a helpdesk embedded deep in a development organisation where it also carries tasks, sprints and releases. If you really need that depth, you are better off buying it separately.
When IDA is the better choice
IDA fits when the chain is mostly creating work: time retyped, maintenance quotas kept in spreadsheets, invoices assembled from two sources. Then what counts is not the feature depth of the individual tool but that ticket, contract, document and open item use the same data. The tax practice keeps DATEV.
Moving over: Step by step: customers, contracts and items are taken over, and tickets run in IDA immediately through the email integration. The commercial side follows at a month or year boundary - open items and stock are taken over, and from then on IDA writes the documents and supplies the DATEV batch.
Questions about replacing the tool chain
Do we have to give up DATEV?
No. The tax practice carries on with DATEV. IDA supplies the posting batch and the documents - it replaces the ERP and the helpdesk, not the cooperation with the practice.
What about the helpdesk everyone is used to?
The change pays off where tickets end in billing. In IDA tickets arrive by email, portal, form or API, with SLA deadlines, contract assignment and time tracking - and the billable part ends up on the document with no transfer.
Can we keep the ERP and only move the service side?
Yes. The commercial part of IDA can be switched off per tenant; you then use tickets, contracts, inventory and time tracking and keep billing in the old system. The benefit is smaller, though - the transfer remains.
How much effort do the handovers cost today?
You can estimate it: the pricing page has a calculator that weighs transfer and rework time against the licence cost.
Do we lose history?
No. Customers, contracts and open items are taken over; the old system stays readable for history until the retention period no longer needs it.