Cartegraph Asset Management vs Elements XS: Which is a better fit?

One of the strengths of the software is its flexibility, allowing users to customize it to their specific needs. This ability to personalize the software can be very useful.

The most frustrating thing that continues to be a headache is the integration with our public facing work order software, Accela. The software's do not communicate well with each other.

Success with asset management starts with good data in the field, and only with that clean data, can admin successfully evaluate programs and changes.

There are many glitches and a lot of data is lost due to this.

We have been very pleased with the overall experience. Customer Service with Cartegraph is very good, and they are just as invested in your success as you are.

Most all of my users are not able to make their own reports due to how difficult they are to build.

I continue to appreciate the far-ranging usefulness of the Structure, Automation, and Asset Condition Managers.

The organizations experience with Cartegraph has been challenging. The system is not the easiest to use due to the many different components and constant upgrades that sometimes is hard to keep up.

Overall, Elements has made a large impact with the efficiency in how we utilize our employee assets. But more importantly, their greatest asset to me is the ease at which I can communicate with them.

There was a little struggle to scope out how we integrated with other systems.

It helps managers see the great work their employees are doing. It helps plan budgets for assets, personnel, and supplies.

Overall when I first started working with Elements XS, I was extremely disappointed but the program is upgrading and increasing capabilities.

Easy system to use, great product, great customer service.

I like being able to create custom workflows and forms so the tasks can be processed exactly how we want.