AEMS Driver-Based Approach vs. Task-Based Systems
When Argent developed the AEMS Evergreen Compliance System our intention was not to build “another compliance system” but to offer a new approach to regulatory compliance. We had experienced numerous instances of task-based systems failing to deliver for our clients and for ourselves when we attempted to move the data we were managing for our clients into a task driven system we had purchased. Prior to AEMS, companies that bought a computer-based compliance system experienced a success rate for implementing the product of less that 20% (Argent was in the “greater than 80%” category-our purchased system failed miserably)! Failures were not always due to the system itself, but also resulted from personnel changes, company management or philosophy changes, and failure on the part of the buyer to allocate enough time and money to account for the inherent setbacks in the task-based implementation process. For the few systems that our clients and contacts had finally implemented, the common complaints were that the implementation costs were more than expected, the system required more maintenance effort than expected (leading to many users questioning whether it was worth keeping), and the difficulty and expense associated with making any changes was much greater than anticipated.
Our research led us to the belief that an effective compliance system must focus on the “driver” that leads to the requirement to complete a task rather than on the task itself. The process of implementation and the end result of AEMS versus the multitude of task-based systems are consequently profoundly different. By properly recognizing the tasks as a part of the overall compliance process rather than the driver for compliance itself, the users and owners of AEMS are not painted into a corner. Instead, they enjoy virtually unlimited flexibility with the management of the compliance tasks and general compliance requirements. The immediate benefits to the users of AEMS are: reduced implementation costs, more thorough documentation, ease of updating requirements, and significantly greater flexibility to define and manage tasks.
The AEMS approach to implementation is based upon the belief that “regulatory compliance is not rocket science, it is gobbledygook”. The first step to managing this quagmire of compliance requirements is to identify and capture all of the requirements as opposed to “trashing” compliance requirements that do not fit into a task slot. Those responsible for verifying and reporting on the compliance status of their sites-whether reporting to regulatory agencies or to share holders-can take more comfort in reports from AEMS that document the entire compliance picture than they can with a summary of tasks that result from a task-based system.
Capturing every applicable and potentially applicable requirement is simple in AEMS but virtually impossible in a task-based system. AEMS is efficient, capturing every requirement and doing it in less time than it takes a task-based system to capture just a small portion of the applicable requirements. Yet another significant benefit with AEMS is that the end user/owner does not have to spend weeks with a consulting firm to determine where you want your end point to be. The AEMS implementation experts apply their regulatory knowledge to identify the regulations, permit conditions, policies and company rules applicable to the site and to all regulated equipment. The end result is a fully populated system with all of the tasks associated with each of those “drivers”.
In summary, users will experience the ease of performing a vast amount of actions in AEMS with the click of one or two buttons. These features are not available in a task-based system or are possible but with a great deal more effort than with AEMS.