We bring the chain of quote, project, time record, milestone claim and invoice together on a single record. In agencies, consultancies, engineering practices and software firms, who spent how long on which job, resource utilisation and project profitability become visible while the work is still running, not once it has finished.
What a service business sells is hours and expertise, and almost all of its cost is people. Even so, in most agencies, consultancies, engineering practices and software firms it is not clear who spent how much time on which project. The quote sits in an Excel file, the project plan in another file, the time spent in people's memories, and the invoice in the accounting package. At the end of the month the revenue is visible, but how much of that revenue came from which project, and at what margin, is not. As the firm grows, so does the uncertainty: the team grows, the number of projects grows, but the question of which work actually makes money is still answered by guesswork. The most uncomfortable part is this: the project that takes the most effort is often the one that earns the least, and that is only noticed months after the work has finished.
The second problem is the distance between the quote and what actually happens. When the quote is given, a scope and a duration are assumed; once the work starts, the scope quietly widens. Extra revisions are requested, the number of meetings goes up, the client adds a new heading, and none of this turns into a written change record. The team knows it from experience but has nothing to show. When it is time to invoice, the conversation rests on memory rather than on records, and the extra work done is usually closed off without being billed. This is a quiet loss that never looks large on any single occasion but adds up to a serious figure by the end of the year. The same uncertainty also wears down the client relationship, because the other side cannot clearly see what it is paying for either.
The third is the resourcing side. In a service business the real capacity is people, and in most firms nobody measures how much of that capacity is committed. Who is genuinely swamped, who is sitting idle and which week is free next month can only be found out by asking one person at a time. So the decision to take on new work is made on instinct too: either work is taken on when there is no capacity and deliveries slip, or work is turned away while capacity sits spare. Hiring decisions are handed over to the same uncertainty. Once utilisation starts being measured, most of these pictures change, because the gap between hours worked and hours that can be billed to a client turns out to be larger than most firms assume.
Professional services automation (PSA) brings this chain together on a single record: when a quote is accepted a project is opened, the plan and the budget carry the same numbers as the quote, the time spent is booked straight to the project and the task, and milestone claims and invoices are produced from that record. Project profitability is therefore seen while the work is running, not after it has finished. The honest warning here is this: time recording is a cultural job, not a technical one. The system stays empty if the team does not enter records daily, and every screen that makes entry harder brings that outcome closer. One more warning: turning time recording into a surveillance tool is the fastest route to failure. The moment the team believes the record will be used against them, the data is corrupted, and all that is left is a profitability calculation built on the wrong numbers.
Teams running advertising, digital marketing, design and production work across a client portfolio. The two items that erode profitability most in these firms are revisions of indeterminate number and scope that widens verbally. As long as neither is recorded, the fact that the client you put the most effort into is actually the one earning you the least is never seen.
Consultancy, architecture, engineering and advisory practices working on a project or milestone basis. Here the time record is not only an internal cost calculation but often the basis of the milestone claim presented to the client. Keeping the record at the level of person, date and work item makes both the invoice explainable and the next quote grounded in real data.
Software firms that have both project work and a product of their own. What most often gets lost in this structure is the hours going into product development dissolving inside project costs. Once it is clear which work the hours went to, the true cost of the product investment becomes visible for the first time, and project pricing rests on a base free of that burden.
Technical firms providing support, maintenance or managed services for a fixed monthly fee. In this model, if how much of the contracted hour pool has been used is not tracked, the hours over the limit quietly fall on the firm. Making pool usage visible both internally and to the client is the strongest argument at contract renewal.
A won quote turns into a project in one step; the work items, estimated durations and prices in the quote open as the project's budget. What was sold and what is being done can then be compared against the same numbers. As the gaps between estimates and actuals accumulate, later quotes stop resting on a feel for the market and start resting on your own historical data.
Time recording is designed so that it can be entered during the day, from a phone or a desktop, in a few seconds: recently used tasks, suggestions drawn from the calendar, weekly bulk entry and missing-day warnings. These details are not cosmetic; the one thing that decides whether the system lives or dies is whether recording becomes a daily habit. Entries pass through the project lead's approval at the end of the week; approval is the natural point at which gaps are caught.
Every record is split into billable, non-billable and internal work. Utilisation and billability are reported separately by person, team and period. These two ratios are the most fundamental indicators in a service business: one tells you how much of your capacity is being used, the other how much of the used capacity turns into revenue. In most firms the gap between them is seen here for the first time.
Who is on which project in which week is visible on a single calendar; leave, public holidays and part-time working are deducted from capacity. Comparing planned load against available capacity makes overloaded people and empty weeks apparent in advance. Before new work is taken on, the question of who will do it is answered by looking at the calendar rather than by guessing.
Every additional request from the client turns into a change record, with an estimate of time and amount, before it is accepted. An approved change updates the project's budget; an unapproved request remains on record. Scope growth therefore happens visibly rather than quietly, and the additional work items that can be invoiced at the end of the period are drawn from the record rather than from memory. This record is also the calmest ground on which to hold the conversation with the client.
Different pricing models such as fixed price, day rate, staged milestone claims and monthly contracts all run in the same system. The amount to be invoiced is proposed automatically from the time records and the completed stages; after approval it is passed to the e-Fatura (Turkish e-invoicing) flow and to your accounting package. Because collection status comes back to the project record, the profitability calculation can look not only at the invoice issued but at the amount actually collected.
On the revenue side, invoices and milestone claims; on the cost side, per-person hourly cost, external procurement and direct expenses are brought together; profitability is produced separately at project, client, service type and account owner level. The report is read while the work is still running, not once it is finished: a project that passes a set proportion of its budget raises a warning while the work continues. How hourly costs are to be calculated is decided together during discovery.
First we map how you make money: which work is fixed price, which is day rate, which is a monthly contract. When the pricing structure changes, so does the design of the time record and of the profitability calculation. In this step we also put in writing the questions that go unanswered today; the success of the system will ultimately be measured by whether those questions get answered.
We decide together how the project will be broken down: to what level tasks will be defined, and in what detail time will be recorded. Caution is needed here; too deep a breakdown makes recording harder and the team soon stops entering anything. It is generally healthier to start with a small number of understandable work items and go deeper if needed.
The system is built in short stages, and a working piece is shown at the end of each one. Connections to your accounting package, the e-Fatura flow, your calendar and any existing project management tool are made during this period. Depending on the scope, the first usable version usually appears within 6-10 weeks; the exact timeline is given in writing after discovery.
We start with a single team or a limited client portfolio. During this period the time records build up and hourly cost rates are corrected against real data. It is normal for the first calculations to come out wrong; if the calibration is skipped, the profitability report loses credibility and management stops looking at it. The pilot usually runs for two full invoicing periods.
All teams are brought onto the system, and the management dashboard and periodic reports are opened up. Training is given; why time recording is being asked for is explained plainly to the team, because unless it is explained, the records stay incomplete. The source code, the database and the documentation are handed over. Maintenance and further development then run under a separate agreement.
The system stays empty and the profitability report comes out wrong. We say this at the outset, because it is the leading cause of failure in these projects. There are technical measures we can take: an interface that brings entry down to a few seconds, suggestions drawn from the calendar, missing-day warnings and weekly approval. But what really decides it is management's stance. Unless recording is tied to something that serves the team, that is, if the team only gives data and sees nothing in return, the habit will not take hold.
No, and that is a deliberate limit. We do not take screenshots, we do not log keystrokes, and we do not monitor mouse movement or which application is active. The system holds only the time record a person enters themselves. The reason for this choice is not only ethical but practical: in a time recording system that turns into a surveillance tool, the team enters defensive records that do not reflect reality, and the data left over is useless for a profitability calculation. What you want to measure is not how hard a person works but what the work costs.
The two look at different questions. Project and portfolio management focuses on which projects will be undertaken, how resources are allocated at portfolio level and how the plan is progressing; it comes to the fore in organisations running investment projects. Professional services automation looks at the money side of the project: the hours sold, the hours spent, the amount invoiced and the profit left. In a project-based service firm the two often merge into one system; which of them carries more weight is something we decide by looking at your business model.
No. Logo, Mikro, Netsis or whichever package you use stays where it is. The system we build does not replace accounting; it talks to it on the invoicing and collection side. The amount to be invoiced is calculated on our side and, after approval, passed to your accounting package or to the e-Fatura flow. The aim is to end entering the same data by hand in two places, and to be able to calculate project profitability against the real figures in accounting.
You do not have to. Changing the task tool a team is used to often takes away more than it gains. We connect to these tools over their APIs and read the tasks and their completion status; time is recorded against the same task list wherever possible. If your tool does not expose data externally, or if the team is already unhappy with it, we will discuss bringing task management inside the system as well. We take that decision together during discovery; we do not impose it at the outset.
Project and budget records linked to the quote; time records entered daily and passed through approval; utilisation and billability by person and by team; a resource assignment calendar; scope change records; a milestone claim and invoice flow with a link to accounting; profitability reports by project, client and service type. Everything produced, including the source code, the database and the documentation, belongs to you; you are not locked into a tool, or into us.
In a 30-minute discovery call we listen to what you need and tell you honestly whether custom development or an off-the-shelf product is the better answer.
We do not replace your hospital information management system; we build an operations layer that runs alongside it. Appointments and resource utilisation, treatment plan tracking, reminders, consumable and implant stock, the patient journey in health tourism and the management dashboard all come together in this layer. The source code and the data stay with you.
Details →We take the company's paperwork out of folders and personal computers and move it into a single archive. Every document's version, who may see it, which approval it passed through and how long it will be kept are defined in the system; the document you are looking for is found in seconds rather than minutes, and its history can be evidenced in an audit. A DMS manages the document itself; ECM covers the process and the content that flow with it.
Details →We build a system that produces a contract from a template, puts it through approval and signature, and — once it is signed — tracks effectivity, renewal, the notice period for termination and the parties' commitments. Contract lifecycle management (CLM) is exactly that: not storing a file, but managing the contract's lifetime. A contract whose term has run out does not quietly extend itself because nobody noticed.
Details →We build an arrangement in which faults and requests arrive through a single record rather than through a messaging app, a corridor conversation or a phone call. Every request is prioritised, has a clear owner and a measured resolution time. We run the same structure not only in IT but also for human resources, administrative affairs and maintenance requests. That is what enterprise service management (ESM) means.
Details →Who is using which computer, phone, server and network device, which licence expires when, which subscription quietly renews itself: we gather all of it into a single record system. Assignment, warranty, the renewal calendar and decommissioning run in the same system; the inventory moves out of personal memory and into the organisation's records.
Details →We tie risks to their owners and place a control, and the evidence for that control, against each risk. Policies run under version control, audit findings are tracked to a deadline, and a regulatory change lands with the right person. Work on personal data, occupational safety and the environment is read from a single dashboard under the same roof.
Details →
