What workflow/client management system do you use?

[Guest Peacy]

We are looking into a client management system, as well as a workflow system for our TPA. I've herad about PensionPro, NexusTPA, Pension Portal (EBG), and I hear that FT WIlliam has new software coming out.

Ultimately, we are interested a some sort of a client portal and workflow system that would track time, track where we are on a plan, etc.

I'm curious to see what systems others use and how it's working out?

[Gadgetfreak]

I have looked at them all. PensionPro seems very promising. However, withany system that is "off the shelf" you are limited to how much customization you can do to meet your specific needs. So, when evaluating, see what system will bend to your needs instead of making you change to its design. Although, in some cases you may find that its design is more efficient than your current process. Each of the three systems you mentioned were designed by TPAs.

In addition, look at non-TPA specific systems. A Document Management System (DMS) with workflow capabilities (and a client portal) may be better for you. Since TPA workflows are very document-centric, you may have better luck with a system like that (which typically allows for more customization). For example, as TPAs we get a distribution form or a census from a client and it goes through many stages of a workflow before it is fully "processed".

Finally, for a little self-promotion, you may be interested in attending this: http://www.asppa.org/Main-Menu/confswebcasts/webcasts/091813.aspx.

[Guest Peacy]

Thank you for your response. I'll have to sign up for that ASPPA webcast. I really like the design of PensionPro and their layout, but the initial cost ($3,000-$4,000) and annual cost ($16,000-$17,000) is a bit steep...

[BG5150]

Colored folders and a handheld label maker.

[Below Ground]

I wrote my own which tracks workflow, deadlines, comments, specials projects and reminders. Does not track time spent. Still, seeing the costs noted, I am satisfied with that deficiency.

[Bantais]

On 7/31/2013 at 7:10 PM, Gadgetfreak said:

I have looked at them all. PensionPro seems very promising. However, withany system that is "off the shelf" you are limited to how much customization you can do to meet your specific needs. So, when evaluating, see what system will bend to your needs instead of making you change to its design. Although, in some cases you may find that its design is more efficient than your current process. Each of the three systems you mentioned were designed by TPAs.

In addition, look at non-TPA specific systems. A Document Management System (DMS) with workflow capabilities (and a client portal) may be better for you. Since TPA workflows are very document-centric, you may have better luck with a system like that (which typically allows for more customization). For example, as TPAs we get a distribution form or a census from a client and it goes through many stages of a workflow before it is fully "processed". For example, as TPAs we get a distribution form or a census from a client and it goes through many stages of a workflow before it is fully "processed". If you're also exploring workflow automation, you might want to look at integrate jira via LateNode, which can connect Jira with other systems and streamline document-centric processes.

Finally, for a little self-promotion, you may be interested in attending this: http://www.asppa.org/Main-Menu/confswebcasts/webcasts/091813.aspx.

 

A good point about the balance between a "ready-made solution" and flexibility. In practice, you almost always run into the fact that off-the-shelf systems either require you to customize processes or quickly become restrictive as processes grow or become more complex.

And yes, often more universal Document Management Systems with a proper workflow and client portal are even more convenient for TPA-like processes, because everything is truly tied to documents, statuses, and approval routes. Plus, you can compile the logic closer to the actual process, rather than the vendor's "design."

I also agree with the idea that sometimes "system limitations" unexpectedly help—they force you to simplify and standardize processes, and ultimately they work faster and more reliably than custom schemes that try to replicate the chaos of the old 1-to-1 process.