Challenges before 1C:Drive implementationPrior to migration to 1C:Drive, Sogester relied on the Navis Express terminal system to log all terminal operations (such as cargo arrival, container handling, and truck departures) with second-by-second precision. However, the system had significant limitations:
- Lack of flexibility. The system was rigid and did not allow customization for Sogester’s unique business processes. Updates were only implemented if they benefited a large number of users, leaving Sogester unable to adapt the system to their specific needs.
- Manual processes. Many operations, such as billing, document verification, and financial checks, were manual, leading to inefficiencies and potential errors.
- No built-in tax reporting system. Tax reporting was handled in a different, non-integrated system, which also incurred additional costs and user actions: to prepare tax reports, users needed to first transfer all company documents from Navis Express to the tax reporting system.
Sogester needed a flexible, scalable, and customizable solution to automate all their current and future business processes and combine everything in one place. So they decided to migrate to 1C:Drive. The main advantage of the 1C:Enterprise platform is its flexibility. The developer can make any changes to the system and implement any scenario the customer wants. This was not an easy journey as a lot of customizations were required, and the project took several years, but it was definitely worth it.
Project PhasesPhase 1: Data migrationThe first step was to transfer all existing data from Navis Express to 1C:Drive. This required a thorough analysis of both systems to ensure data integrity and compatibility. The goal was to create a unified database that could support Sogester’s complex operations across multiple terminals.
Phase 2: Process automationThe main idea of the project was to build a flexible billing system to automate billing and document management processes for all operations at Sogester ports. The complexity arose from the need to handle multiple types of customers, different combinations of services, and complex pricing rules.
The service price depended on a combination of the following parameters:
- Customer type: different groups (Gate clients, VIP/credit clients, Lines, Brokers) required unique billing processes, documentation, and payment terms.
- Service bundles: services were categorized into standard (fixed tariffs) and custom (negotiated tariffs) with flexible discounts.
- Additional conditions: variables like free storage days, inspection fees, and fines increased the complexity.