I also worked as a consultant for many years and I can say this sounds like a people/process problem, not a technical one. And as such I do not expect that technical arguments will carry much weight (unless they significantly effect the process). As such, if you have no alternative process to "sell" then you will find this very difficult.
Some others have provided good process suggestions but unless you can marry that to the people in your organization and help realize the final business goals too, you will be stuck with the group decision. Unfortunately it is the cost of working in a team. On the plus side, this is usually best as "winning" implies ownership and you will be left working every problem associated with the result until it's operating smoothly. Or to put it another way, "be careful what you wish for, you just might get it". If you do decide to work through and "sell" a ledger based process make sure not to criticize GnuCash unless it is over something absolutely fundamental (i.e. we cannot achieve goal X with that tool). Just focus on optimizing your process for the people so that they see "ledger = less work". As others have mentioned I believe that conflicts will be your critical road-block in managing a multi-user process. 'git' is not a solution and, a suggestion that it is will likely kill any representation of yourself as a sane work colleague (unless of course your colleagues are already 'git' proficient). This will lead to consolidation efforts among multiple user files and this is the opposite result you want (i.e. "ledger = more work") and thus you will need to find a significant process improvement to offset that. IMO the strongest argument is independence. The ability to allow independent reporting to be consolidated quickly and effectively. To gradually grow the costing structure to match the different parts of an organization and discover and develop the higher level reporting structure inline with that development. This requires long-term investment in the process but as cost control is so fundamental to a successful organization, this is more a positive assertion of engagement than a problem. The same process is far less dynamic in a centralized (database like) system, where we must globally define the different cost centers and accounts for all departments at once. Likewise they must be revised and consolidated at once. The reality is that this very rarely happens and it can cause your cost analysis to stagnate with an archaic or faulty view of your organization. Good luck and have fun (it makes the battle easier). On 13/04/2017, Antoine Beaupre <anar...@orangeseeds.org> wrote: > On 2017-04-10 23:55:20, James wrote: >> Hi, >> So my colleagues at work feel that I should use GNUCash for accounting >> purpose at work.I have tried using GNUCash but its rather very >> clunky(especially after using Ledger). >> At my work place we process on average 100 transactions a day and our >> ledger can grow quite quickly. My colleagues argue that GNUCash will be >> easier manage and keep things organized as opposed to Ledger. >> >> I think ledger with orgmode is quite organized. Furthermore the idea of >> having the entire company account in a single text file is very >> intimidating to them so please share your views. >> >> Appreciate if someone could share their view on this. > > This will obviously not be a popular opinion here, but I found Gnucash > to work pretty well for a small business. I used it for 2 years for a > non-profit tech coop i co-founded in 2004, but we didn't have that many > transactions (we had 1200 transactions over those two years). > > We ended up switching to SQL-Ledger/LedgerSMB back then, mostly because > we needed multi-user support, which wasn't so good in Gnucash back then, > although I heard things have improved. > > Since I have left my job there, I resumed doing my own accounting as a > freelancer, and for this I'm using ledger-cli. I found a few quirks and > issues, but it mostly works for my small needs. > > But I can't imagine running 100 transactions per day in ledger-cli. I > can't think of how I would allow for multiple to add transactions > simultaneously. Git? I already have merge conflicts with myself, and > they are not fun... > > For this I would use an actual database-backed system like LedgerSMB, > Odoo or Tryton, probably the latter because it has nice Debian packages > and it's not written in perl, although I have only had experience with > LedgerSMB, which had worrisome consistency issues in the 1.2 version > (although there was a major cleanup done in 1.3+ releases). > > Good luck! > > A. > > -- > feature, n: a documented bug | bug, n: an undocumented feature > - Mario S F Ferreira <li...@freebsd.org> > > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Ledger" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to ledger-cli+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ledger" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ledger-cli+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
