In the first days of issue tracking, the debate between in house tracking and web based tracking was non-existent.
All issue tracking was conducted in house, and it's probably a good thing that it was.
Whereas today's tracking interfaces don't require special knowledge to operate, the interfaces of yesterday were prohibitive to all but expert users.
As a result, companies that wanted to reap the benefits of issue tracking had to hire computer personnel to operate the systems, which is the opposite professional value associated with today's issue tracking systems, whether in house or hosted.
Instead of delivering a significant value at a significant price, today's issue tracking systems must deliver a significant value at an insignificant price to be financially viable.
With this in mind, we can judge the effectiveness of in house issue-tracking versus web based issue tracking using three criteria: tracking capabilities, communication capabilities and overall cost.
Tracking Capabilities The term issue tracking describes what an issue tracking system generally does: it reports and tracks "issues" that arise within company projects or that occur within a company's daily operations.
For example, issues that arise within a project will be communicated to a project manager or a certain employee for resolution, at which time a tracking system allows system users to observe the progress toward resolving the issue.
When the issue is resolved, it can be marked as such and its file stored in a database for future reference.
Both in house and web based issue-tracking systems are able to provide these capabilities without noticeable difference, supposing that an in house system is as technologically up to date as a hosted system or vice versa.
Therefore, in terms of pure tracking capability, in house and hosted systems are basically equal.
Communication Capabilities Concerning communication capabilities, in house systems and hosted systems differ markedly.
Whereas in house systems are limited to inner company communication, hosted systems allow for inter company communication, which is essential for companies that work closely with clients, partner with other companies, have multiple company locations or have employees that work from home.
Essentially, a hosted issue-tracking system provides its users with remote access via Internet terminals worldwide.
But the question naturally arises whether this benefit is indeed a benefit for small to midsize companies that conduct business internally.
On the surface, hosted tracking would seem unnecessary for companies that do business in house.
But if a company that works internally uses vendors or has officials who travel to trade shows and business conferences, hosted tracking is a better idea than in house tracking.
Overall Cost To implement an in house system, a company must buy the necessary hardware, software and connection supplies to integrate its computers to the tracking system.
With hosted tracking, on the other hand, companies can pay an affordable monthly free (roughly $10 per system user) and avoid software and hardware costs, as well as maintenance costs and the cost of software and hardware updates.
In addition, some hosted tracking providers offer services on a pay as you go basis, meaning that companies can cancel their service at any time.
Considering the upfront cost of an in house system and the cost of maintenance and updates, web based issue-tracking is significantly more cost effective.
All issue tracking was conducted in house, and it's probably a good thing that it was.
Whereas today's tracking interfaces don't require special knowledge to operate, the interfaces of yesterday were prohibitive to all but expert users.
As a result, companies that wanted to reap the benefits of issue tracking had to hire computer personnel to operate the systems, which is the opposite professional value associated with today's issue tracking systems, whether in house or hosted.
Instead of delivering a significant value at a significant price, today's issue tracking systems must deliver a significant value at an insignificant price to be financially viable.
With this in mind, we can judge the effectiveness of in house issue-tracking versus web based issue tracking using three criteria: tracking capabilities, communication capabilities and overall cost.
Tracking Capabilities The term issue tracking describes what an issue tracking system generally does: it reports and tracks "issues" that arise within company projects or that occur within a company's daily operations.
For example, issues that arise within a project will be communicated to a project manager or a certain employee for resolution, at which time a tracking system allows system users to observe the progress toward resolving the issue.
When the issue is resolved, it can be marked as such and its file stored in a database for future reference.
Both in house and web based issue-tracking systems are able to provide these capabilities without noticeable difference, supposing that an in house system is as technologically up to date as a hosted system or vice versa.
Therefore, in terms of pure tracking capability, in house and hosted systems are basically equal.
Communication Capabilities Concerning communication capabilities, in house systems and hosted systems differ markedly.
Whereas in house systems are limited to inner company communication, hosted systems allow for inter company communication, which is essential for companies that work closely with clients, partner with other companies, have multiple company locations or have employees that work from home.
Essentially, a hosted issue-tracking system provides its users with remote access via Internet terminals worldwide.
But the question naturally arises whether this benefit is indeed a benefit for small to midsize companies that conduct business internally.
On the surface, hosted tracking would seem unnecessary for companies that do business in house.
But if a company that works internally uses vendors or has officials who travel to trade shows and business conferences, hosted tracking is a better idea than in house tracking.
Overall Cost To implement an in house system, a company must buy the necessary hardware, software and connection supplies to integrate its computers to the tracking system.
With hosted tracking, on the other hand, companies can pay an affordable monthly free (roughly $10 per system user) and avoid software and hardware costs, as well as maintenance costs and the cost of software and hardware updates.
In addition, some hosted tracking providers offer services on a pay as you go basis, meaning that companies can cancel their service at any time.
Considering the upfront cost of an in house system and the cost of maintenance and updates, web based issue-tracking is significantly more cost effective.
SHARE
