Nicelabel LMS improvement suggestions

Suggestions for new functionality in NiceLabel. Do you want some feature but can't find it in the NiceLabel software? Post your wish here. Note: This is not a support forum.

Moderators: Georges, milos, NiceLabel Support Team

Nicelabel LMS improvement suggestions

Postby huijbrem » Wed Apr 12, 2017 11:49 am

We have recently purchased the Nicelabel 2017 LMS Enterprise for its capability of controlled printing which is a must have for regulated companies. As I'm working for quite a few years in IT in a pharmaceutical company, I do have a reasonable amount of experience with other regulated computerised systems and noticed that Nicelabel LMS slightly differs from the common practises I am used to.

The biggest difference is the multi-tier environment approach. It is common to have 2 or 3 environments, however Nicelabel suggest to develop, review and approve labels on a QAS environment and after approval to sync in to a production environment. The common practise is to consider label development as an operational process and therefore to be executed on the production environment solely. Usually you have a development environment where application development is done such as customisation to the application, but also is used as a sandbox to fiddle with complex configurations like interfacing with databases, triggers etc especially to prevent to disturb or harming a production environment. The QAS environment is always and ever an exact copy of the production environment where configurations or customisations formally are tested en validated before they are implemented on a production environment.

Label design is a process that belongs on a production enviroment. With some adjustements to a workflow which prohibits that labels in draft and decommisioned state are available for operational use, and also the ability to assign different authors and aprovers to different labels, you can keep this on a single production environment and keep the more high risk configuration development away from the production environment.

Another difference, but allready a known issue, that approvers have the right to delete labels. Deletion of objects by anyone in a production enviroment should not be allowed for traceability reasons. Objects like labels or trigger configurations should be decommissioned for instance by means of a 'obsolete' state.

What I have missed are off the shelf installation qualification protocols. We have asked for them earlier but the reply was that these kind documents were hard to produce because its depency on the costumer's environment. To my opinion, the existing installation guides contain basically all the content you need, shortly just add some sign-off sections and you're almost there.

I hope Nicelabel can take this into consideration and hopefully can help to improve the application.

Kind regards,
Martijn
huijbrem
Enthusiast
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:25 pm

Re: Nicelabel LMS improvement suggestions

Postby Miso » Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:27 pm

Dear Martijn,

We're always happy to listen to our customer recommendations and share experiences. I will send you a private message with a hope we can schedule a short call to discuss.

Looking forward to a constructive debate.

Best regards,

Miso
Miso
NiceLabel
NiceLabel
 
Posts: 332
Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:12 pm
Location: Kranj, Slovenia


Return to Suggestions & New Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest