Discuss requirements
A structured first conversation about your imaging environment, integration landscape, governance expectations, and what “good” looks like for reporting and operations—without jumping straight to a generic SKU conversation.
The fastest way to waste time in enterprise imaging is to treat requirements as a feature checklist. The better approach starts with constraints: campuses, modalities, after-hours coverage, interface ownership, and the committees that will actually approve change.
Bring your real workflows—not only the happy path. We will push on queue behaviour, logging, and operational continuity because those details determine whether a programme survives its first busy winter.
Discovery scope: what we unpack in the first sessions
Expect detailed questions about worklist priority rules, after-hours coverage, referrer distribution channels, and how your organisation handles addenda, peer learning, and trainee reporting. We also map integration ownership: which vendor maintains each interface table, how orders are reconciled to encounters, and where identifiers are allowed to diverge between test and production.
For PACS or reporting replacements, we ask for real macros and voice profiles early—not to be difficult, but because those artefacts often hide the longest migration tail. Teaching hospital pathways and research cohorts also introduce permission subtleties that should surface before contract signatures, not during hypercare week two.
Commercial and procurement alignment
We can work with your procurement team on evaluation criteria that reflect imaging operations: RTO/RPO expectations, support severity definitions, evidence of regression testing, and exit portability for archives and reports. If you require participation in a panel or state contract vehicle, note that early so we can align resourcing.
Pricing reflects scope, deployment model, optional managed services, and support hours. We prefer to anchor numbers to measurable outcomes—sites in scope, modalities, concurrent users, and integration endpoints—rather than generic per-seat lists that ignore Australian deployment realities.