I was looking at the website, but couldn't find if they are offering demo.
Do you maybe know?
I was looking at the website, but couldn't find if they are offering demo.
Do you maybe know?
sagai
Quite Involved in Discussions
Hi there,
yes, seems a bit hidden, here is the link:
Intland Retina 30-Day Free Trial
One question actually to mention ...
When we are saying eQMS or any these kind of software, what is the functionality that we are looking for?
Regards
Saby
yes, seems a bit hidden, here is the link:
Intland Retina 30-Day Free Trial
One question actually to mention ...
When we are saying eQMS or any these kind of software, what is the functionality that we are looking for?
Regards
Saby
NathanEckstein
Registered
Hi any and all following this post!
Happy to help anyone evaluate the Greenlight Guru solution further. With Greenlight Guru having a continuous improvement mindset - we have been able to listen to our customers over the course of the last 7+ years to roll out massive improvements to the software.
With our training management solution rolling out in December 2020 the solution has become an integrated, all-in-one, out of the box eQMS.
The team most recently rolled out a startup package for eQMS with more limited functionality (at a lower price).
Disclaimer - I am a sales professional at Greenlight Guru - happy to provide a very professional transparent sales process. Let me know how I can help! Add me on LinkedIN - Nathan Eckstein
Happy to help anyone evaluate the Greenlight Guru solution further. With Greenlight Guru having a continuous improvement mindset - we have been able to listen to our customers over the course of the last 7+ years to roll out massive improvements to the software.
With our training management solution rolling out in December 2020 the solution has become an integrated, all-in-one, out of the box eQMS.
The team most recently rolled out a startup package for eQMS with more limited functionality (at a lower price).
Disclaimer - I am a sales professional at Greenlight Guru - happy to provide a very professional transparent sales process. Let me know how I can help! Add me on LinkedIN - Nathan Eckstein
just to keep this thread going, ive evaluated a bunch of different options, including:
Mastercontrol Spark
Qualio
QPulse
QT9
Grand Avenue
Green Light Guru
QCBD
From my perspective, the best two are MasterControl and QT9. QT9 seems to give the most bang for the buck, bit very little integration. If you're willing to spend more money, then MasterControl is the way to go. I wish MasterControl offered more templates and options for companies with less developed quality systems.
Mastercontrol Spark
Qualio
QPulse
QT9
Grand Avenue
Green Light Guru
QCBD
From my perspective, the best two are MasterControl and QT9. QT9 seems to give the most bang for the buck, bit very little integration. If you're willing to spend more money, then MasterControl is the way to go. I wish MasterControl offered more templates and options for companies with less developed quality systems.
Jim Ivey
Grand Avenue Software
Hi Joe. My name is Jim Ivey, with Grand Avenue Software. I noticed this comment from a while back about evaluating bunch of options, saw our name on the list, and was interested in any feedback you might have had from your evaluation of our application suite. We always like to get as much input as possible, both from our customers and from companies that end up choosing another direction after the evaluation. If you're willing to share, I'd love to know where we fell short in comparison to the others you mentioned. Feel free to post here, or send me a PM if that's more appropriate.
Thanks ahead of time,
Jim Ivey
Grand Avenue Software
Hi Jim,
Not to be too blunt, but honestly, your user interface looks like it's from 1999. Also, you just dont have the core functions or templates that other systems have. so we ruled your system out really quickly.
but im glad to know that you're listening to feedback.
joe
Jim Ivey
Grand Avenue Software
Hey Joe,
That's pretty blunt
But thanks for taking the time to respond, and the "1999" comment about the user interface is definitely fair (originally designed in 2002). It's not sexy, just functional, and has stayed largely the same over the years based on customer feedback. We rely almost entirely a customer-driven process to prioritize development, and invariably the guidance comes back for new features rather than prettying up the UI. Also, from a testing and validation perspective, it's nice to have something that's pure HTML and consistent across all browser platforms, so we can do most of the regression testing through automation, and have the flexibility to ship new releases on a regular schedule.
With regard to "core functions" of a QMS that we're missing, I'd still be interested in hearing what those are. We've been doing this a long time, with a couple hundred companies actively using our system that keep serving as positive referrals. We're definitely not perfect, but if there were major gaps in the core system I'd think our customers would have left us by now, and definitely not keep recommending us to their suppliers and spin-offs.
Anyway, thanks again for the feedback, however brutal, and best of luck!
Jim
That's pretty blunt
But thanks for taking the time to respond, and the "1999" comment about the user interface is definitely fair (originally designed in 2002). It's not sexy, just functional, and has stayed largely the same over the years based on customer feedback. We rely almost entirely a customer-driven process to prioritize development, and invariably the guidance comes back for new features rather than prettying up the UI. Also, from a testing and validation perspective, it's nice to have something that's pure HTML and consistent across all browser platforms, so we can do most of the regression testing through automation, and have the flexibility to ship new releases on a regular schedule.With regard to "core functions" of a QMS that we're missing, I'd still be interested in hearing what those are. We've been doing this a long time, with a couple hundred companies actively using our system that keep serving as positive referrals. We're definitely not perfect, but if there were major gaps in the core system I'd think our customers would have left us by now, and definitely not keep recommending us to their suppliers and spin-offs.
Anyway, thanks again for the feedback, however brutal, and best of luck!
Jim
Watchcat
Trusted Information Resource
I have this long-standing thing about people (not referring to anyone in particular, including not to anyone in this discussion) who come to a forum and ask for recommendations for or experiences with a service or product without providing any information regarding their selection criteria. I assume they don't have any. Enough said.
Ultimately, it is all about finding the provider or product that matches your needs, and there is never going to be a one size that fits all, or a "best," only the best for this particular set of needs. On the flip, it is all about defining the market with needs that your product or service is a good fit for.
Having said that, I don't judge a book by its cover, but like any book buyer, I give do consideration to the cover. Old cover, old book. Depending on the type of book, the content is probably is going to be a little or a lot different than a book published in the last couple of years. Do I care? Depends on what I'm looking for.
I have no problem providing more feedback. I figure the next person who reads these forums will have some more info, so it's helpful.Hey Joe,
That's pretty blunt
With regard to "core functions" of a QMS that we're missing, I'd still be interested in hearing what those are. We've been doing this a long time, with a couple hundred companies actively using our system that keep serving as positive referrals. We're definitely not perfect, but if there were major gaps in the core system I'd think our customers would have left us by now, and definitely not keep recommending us to their suppliers and spin-offs.
Anyway, thanks again for the feedback, however brutal, and best of luck!
Jim
Aside from the UI, when i was researching EQMS systems, I basically came to the conclusion that there are two tracks: (1) systems that are essentially repositories for information, and (2) systems that help guide your regulatory process.
Grand Ave. generally falls in the first category. Like, yes, it's helpful because it takes you away from paper and gives you a platform to share documents, but given that it's pretty basic, it doesnt do any of the lifting for you. Some of the other systems have more integration with your processes, or even if they arent tailored, they still have connective tissue that helps the process. An example is that a lot of systems let you start a CAPA in the system, and then from in the CAPA you can start a Risk Assessment or an Engineering Change, or a deviation form... So when you look back at the CAPA, you realize that the Risk Assessment is directly connected to the CAPA and if flowed to the Engineering CHange... This is a basic example, but it is something you guys are missing. You're mostly a repository for documents, and that feels like paper. It doesnt let the computer system help much.
Obviously, there are more integrated systems and less integrated. and some require you to basically rebuild your procedures to fit the system. others are basically off the shelf or have some basic check boxes and connective systems that flow you into other related processes. I am not aware of Grand Ave having much of that at all. it's basically only a repository for documents. That's not bad if that's what you are going for, but it's not that hard to find systems with a lot more functions and pretty low prices. not everyone has to go full tilt to get a good system now. Correct me if Im wrong.
Joe
Last edited:
