The announced requirement for an EZD-class (electronic document management) system (deadline pushed back to 2029 at the earliest), KSeF (national e-invoicing), KSC (the National Cybersecurity System Act), the Central Register of Contracts: obligations arrive from different directions, but they land on the same people, departments and budget. Krogis advises municipalities, cities and counties on how to work through these changes step by step: what the office already has, in what order to introduce changes, how to prepare managers and staff, how to choose a vendor and how to check after the rollout that people really are working differently. As an external advisor, with no need to create a new position, and with a time commitment matched to the office’s needs. To begin with, an inventory: 2–6 weeks, below the public-procurement threshold.
View Bcouncil chamberIllustrative photodoes not depict a specific officesheet 1public sector – local governmentWojciech KroczakChange management and digitalisation advisor. 2008–2026: projects with local governments.
Change management in the office. Typical projects and what they change in people’s work.
Each of these projects ends with formal acceptance of the system, but the results only show once staff start working differently. Same principles, different difficulties.
An EZD-class system and electronic case handling
What changes for people: cases no longer circulate on paper. Assigning, approving, signing and archiving all work differently, and heads of unit can see their unit’s cases in the system.
Typical difficulty: departments move at different speeds, and a “parallel paper trail” lives on alongside the system for a long time because it feels safer.
What I focus on: the order in which departments go live, preparing heads of unit first, change ambassadors in each department and a simple measure: how many cases are really handled in the system.
KSeF, e-Doręczenia, the Central Register of Contracts
What changes for people: new obligations change the work of the registry office, accounting and the people who handle contracts, each with a different deadline.
Typical difficulty: they arrive at the same time and land on the same people. Each one on its own is manageable; together they are more than people can absorb.
What I focus on: one map of all the changes in the office: what, who it affects and when, and then an order of work that can be defended.
Integrating line-of-business systems
What changes for people: no more retyping the same data between taxes, finance, HR and the document workflow.
Typical difficulty: every department is used to “its own” data and is afraid of losing control of it.
What I focus on: who is responsible for which data, who decides on changes and how departments will find out what they gain.
AI in the office
What changes for people: a different way of preparing letters, replies and analyses, with a person who checks the result and is accountable for it.
Typical difficulty: fears about jobs and about responsibility for mistakes, and, on the other hand, quiet use of private tools.
What I focus on: rules of use, who is accountable for the decision, which matters to start with and how to show that AI is there to lighten the load, not to replace people.
KSC and NIS 2. County offices and regional self-government units are essential entities regardless of size, and a municipal office becomes one above 50 employees; subordinate units are often important entities. I help establish the status of the whole group and oversee implementation on the management side. KSC from the board’s side
How I help the office. From putting systems in order to ongoing support.
01
IT inventory — the foundation of a digitalisation strategy
Before an office plans new rollouts, it needs to know which systems it uses, how they are connected and where the risks and inconsistencies lie. I bring this information together into a coherent map that makes it possible to set priorities and plan the next steps. It is the foundation for designing the architecture and building an IT strategy — without it, it is hard to make informed decisions about further changes. The starting point is an inventory of IT systems.
02
Supporting the secretary in system rollouts
Rolling out an EZD-class system or any other system takes more than technical decisions: the whole office also has to be prepared for a new way of working. Especially where there are no extensive IT structures, I support the secretary in planning the next steps and preparing the change in how people work, drawing on 20 years of experience and proven implementation practice. In discussions with contractors, I ask the questions that are easy to overlook, check vague assurances and spot omissions before they turn into a costly problem. I help coordinate the work of the departments and IT, so that the office knows what needs to be decided, who is responsible for what and how to get through the rollout safely.
03
Ongoing support for the secretary and senior management
Not every IT decision can be foreseen at the start of the year. That is why, at an agreed time commitment, I remain available to the secretary and the board: I help assess needs, set priorities, oversee projects and talk to contractors. I work with the in-house IT team, supporting management in making decisions — without taking over the IT staff’s day-to-day work.
Questions worth knowing the answer to.
I put them to secretaries, county heads, mayors and treasurers before decisions are taken and money starts to flow. If the answer to any of them is “we don’t know”, that is exactly where I can help.
How will we explain to the council what the IT money is spent on, and why exactly that amount?
Do we know which digital obligations already apply to us and which are only announced, and who is responsible for them?
Will the choice of an EZD-class system be a decision we can defend before an audit?
What happens if the vendor raises the price or withdraws support?
Will employees accept the new system, and who will help them?
The cost of a mistake. A badly chosen EZD-class system means years of work in the wrong document workflow and a costly migration a few years on. An advisor usually costs less than a single badly chosen technology, a single wrong vendor or a single trap in a contract.
What you gain. The documents are a tool, not the goal.
Peace of mind during an auditDocumented due diligence: a written record of what you knew, what the options were and why you chose the one you did. For the Regional Audit Chamber (RIO), the Supreme Audit Office (NIK) and the council.
A budget that stands up before the councilSplit into obligation and investment, plus the cost of doing nothing, presented in the council’s own language.
An experienced advisor on a project you haven’t run beforeOver 20 years of such projects, including in local government, alongside your own IT staff. Decisions stay with you.
Staff who’ll actually adopt the new systemA change plan, training and change ambassadors in each department.
Less money spentYou don’t buy what you already have, and you don’t pay for contract amendments covering integrations that could have been foreseen.
What’s ahead of you by 2029. Every item starts with the same question: what does the office already have?
Obligations are piling up faster than the expertise needed to handle them. The inventory is the first step for every one of them, and it only needs doing once.
Shoal mapthe office’s obligations up to 2029coursefrom the inventory to an EZD-class systemsheet 2illustrative drawing
An EZD-class systeman announced obligation, with the deadline pushed back to 2029 at the earliest
Rolling out or migrating to an EZD-class system (e.g. from EZD PUW) is a chance to review the whole document-flow architecture — or to repeat the same mistakes in the new system. Choosing a specific system (the government’s EZD RP, developed by NASK, or another compliant one) is a separate decision. In a two- or three-person IT team, typical of a mid-sized office, what is usually missing is not willingness but someone who has already been through such a selection and rollout and will help see it through. From the inventory: a document-flow and integration map, migration requirements, contract clauses.
The 2027 budget draftdue by 15 November 2026
The IT budget is a single line item, with no split between regulatory obligation and rising maintenance cost. From the inventory: a split into obligation and investment, plus the cost of doing nothing — the justification the treasurer and the council expect.
KSC / NIS 2already in force
Poland’s National Cybersecurity System Act and the EU’s NIS 2 directive impose obligations and penalties on public bodies that can’t simply be “handed to IT” — the organisation and its board are accountable. An independent advisor looks at these risks from the board’s perspective, not IT’s: identifying them and helping mitigate them, so the board has the arguments in hand when it needs to demonstrate compliance. From the inventory: a systems register and a risk register — the starting point for risk management.
KSeFalready in force
Mandatory structured invoicing requires integration with existing finance systems, not just buying a new module. From the inventory: an integration matrix with the finance system.
e-Doręczeniaalready live
Moving official correspondence to the national e-delivery service touches registry and records-handling processes across the whole organisation, not just the secretariat. From the inventory: a map of which processes are supported by systems and which are not.
Audits and inspectionsat any time
A funding call requiring a diagnosis as an attachment, a Regional Audit Chamber inspection, or the departure of your only IT specialist — each of these raises a question nobody asked before. From the inventory: a documented justification for every purchasing decision.
Central Register of Contracts (CRU JSFP)in force since 1 July 2026
Without integration, this is one more manual burden: the head of the office must make information on every paid contract concluded since 1 July 2026, with no value threshold, available in the register within 30 days and update it whenever anything changes. The register is public, so delays and errors are visible to everyone — including the council and auditors. The contracts register naturally connects to KSeF invoicing — an invoice belongs to a case in the EZD-class system and has to be linked to a contract and approved before it reaches the finance system. From the inventory: a map of that chain (KSeF → EZD system → central register → finance), who approves what and when data reaches the register.
Access managementa KSC obligation
Who has access to what? Without an orderly process for onboarding, offboarding and changing permissions, there’s nothing to show an auditor. From the inventory: a permissions register and a process for granting, changing and revoking permissions.
The secretary doesn’t have to do this alone. The first such project in this office, but not the first in my practice.
The secretary is appointed to organise the office’s work. Today an EZD-class system rollout, a KSeF invoice workflow and e-Doręczenia all land on their desk — large IT projects, and even larger projects of changing how people work. Often the first such projects of their career, run with two or three IT staff who already have their hands full keeping the office running.
I bring over 20 years of experience in such projects, across different organisations and organisational cultures, including local government. On an agreed, part-time basis, as an external advisory service, without creating a new post.
I know which questions to ask before a decision is made.
I help carry out the change so staff actually adopt the new system: a communication plan, training, change ambassadors in each department, conversations with the unconvinced. I advise on the user-adoption strategy.
I keep the vendor and the schedule on track, and the secretary gets short summaries and decides where it matters.
I leave a paper trail for every decision, in case of an audit or questions from the council.
Decisions and accountability stay with the office’s authorities. I don’t administer systems and I don’t decide in place of the mayor or county head: I provide sound grounds for decisions and help oversee their implementation.
Is this your situation? Four things worth knowing before the first conversation.
What often points to it
It is common for EZD, KSeF, KSC and Central Register of Contracts deadlines to sit in different folders and with different people. Often nobody can say in one sentence which systems the office has and who is responsible for them. The IT budget can be a single line that the council finds hard to assess properly.
What may happen if you put it off
Decisions can end up being made under deadline pressure, on the strength of a vendor’s offer rather than the office’s requirements. The risk then grows of contract annexes, duplicated purchases and dependence on a single vendor. For obligations under the KSC Act, the head of the office remains responsible for them even after delegating them to someone else.
Who is usually the sponsor
Most often the secretary or the treasurer, with a clear mandate from the mayor or county head. Without a decision from the office’s leadership, it is usually not worth starting.
What I don’t do
I don’t take over the duties of the head of the office, administer systems or issue legal opinions. Decisions and responsibility stay with the office.
The smallest safe first step: a 30-minute call at no charge, then an inventory (2–6 weeks, below the public-procurement threshold). Until then you commit to nothing.
Obligations have deadlines and projects have owners. Someone has to see it all at once.
EZD, KSeF, KSC, the Central Register of Contracts and e-Doręczenia often land on the same few people. Deadlines can collide with the day-to-day running of the office, and what is known about progress gets scattered across emails and people’s heads. What is often missing then is not knowledge but a standing order of work.
For an agreed time commitment, I keep that order on the office’s side: every task has an owner, a deadline and a status, and the secretary and senior management know where things stand.
One register of obligations and projects with owner, deadline and status, alongside a register of risks, decisions and documents.
A weekly status from task owners, a short meeting and a note with a list of actions and deadlines.
Reminders, checks that documentation is complete, and an early warning before a deadline is missed.
A monthly report for the secretary and senior management, ready for questions from the council or an audit as well.
I don’t take over delivery and I don’t decide for the office: every action has an owner on the office’s side.
Procedures from the paper era. Followed out of habit, because “that’s how it’s always been done”.
In public offices, and also in professional self-regulatory bodies and similar institutions, many tasks are still done under procedures built for an analogue world. Often nobody remembers why they’re done that way.
FirstAn inventory and a description of the current state.
Then
what you could want in the first place,
how to approach market research,
which tools to use: case-workflow systems, a low-code platform, automating repetitive tasks (RPA), simple AI tools, or sometimes a plain document-management system is enough.
Knowledge of the market and of the available solutions is my greatest strength: it helps match the tool to the problem, instead of the problem to whatever tool someone happens to be selling.
What the board sees after 2–6 weeks.
A one-page summary you can put on the desk of the county head and the treasurer, a presentation for a board meeting, and a full set of documents for the next tender.
One-page summary for the board
The county office’s systems: state and recommendation6 of 14 systems
Document workflow (EZD PUW)Secretariatdevelopment until 2029C
Finance and accountingTreasurercontract until 2028B
HR and payrollHRup to dateA
Taxes and feesFinance departmentno APIB
Land surveying and cadastreSurveyingup to dateA
Invoice workflow under KSeFno ownergapD
2 to keep2 to adapt1 to replace1 gap
Recommendation: start with document workflow before choosing an EZD-class system. Handle KSeF through integration with the finance system, not a new system.
Example with illustrative data; the layout is that of the real document.
Board presentation, 12–15 slides
A draft outline. A 60–90 minute session included in the price.
Goal and scope of the inventory. What we counted, and what we deliberately didn’t.
Map of the office’s systems. Who owns them, what they cost, when support ends.
A/B/C/D categories. What to keep, adapt, replace, and what’s missing.
Risks and their weighting. A 20-risk register with a heat map, including KSC/NIS 2 and vendor lock-in.
Document workflow before choosing an EZD-class system. What to migrate, simplify, integrate.
Decision options. Real options with the cost and risk of each.
The cost of doing nothing. What happens if we do nothing before 2029.
Budget. Split into regulatory obligation and investment, ready for the council session.
Recommendation and schedule. The first three steps and who owns them.
A document-flow and integration map, migration requirements, contract clauses.
Repeating the old workflow’s mistakes in the new system, paid contract amendments for integrations left out of the contract, missing the deadline.
KSC / NIS 2
A systems register and a weighted risk register.
Penalties and board liability for having no documented risk management.
Budget and the council session
A split of spending into obligation and investment, the cost of doing nothing, a one-page recommendation.
The council rejecting the spend, or objecting to a single unexplained “IT system” line item.
RIO and NIK inspections
Documented A/B/C/D categorisation and a justification for purchasing decisions.
A finding of mismanagement or unsupported decisions.
Quote after a call
Depending on the number of systems and departments. I confirm the exact price after a 30-minute call about the scale of your office.
Below the public-procurement threshold. No procedure under the Public Procurement Law is needed; the order follows the office’s own internal rules.
2–6 weeks from signing to the board session, 1–3 days on site, about 10 hours of your coordinator’s time.
No access to residents’ personal data. Work at the level of systems, contracts and configuration. A confidentiality agreement before the start.
What’s in it for the secretary, the treasurer and the IT manager.
Secretary, mayor, county head
Responsible for an organisation with the problems of a mid-sized company — but without management experience in digitalisation, and without time to gain it by trial and error.
Gets: a one-page recommendation and a rollout schedule for an EZD-class system — a schedule they can manage without IT expertise.
Gains: an advisor on the project and the change, not just documents.
Treasurer
Has to defend the IT budget before the council — needs a split into regulatory obligation and investment, not a single “IT system” line item, and someone to prepare and present that justification alongside the board.
Gets: a split of IT spending into obligation and investment, plus maintenance costs, for the multi-year financial forecast. Also gets a justification for the budget draft and for the council session.
Gains: a budget that can be defended before the council and won’t spring surprises in the years ahead.
IT manager
An ally, if the inventory becomes an argument for their budget — not an assessment of their past work.
Gets: a register, a repeatable methodology, and budget arguments, built together with them, not behind their back.
Gains: an ally in the conversation with the board and time to keep the office running.
The board is accountable to more than itself — it has to answer to the council, a body chosen in general elections. The hardest moment is asking for a bigger budget or approval for spending. An IT project then has to be presented in plain, understandable language, without technical jargon, so the council can make an informed decision. Krogis prepares the board for that conversation and — alongside it — presents the council with the inventory, the risks, the cost of doing nothing and the justification for the spend: translating from the language of IT and regulation into a recommendation that will stand up before the council.
A small, concrete scope to start, widened as trust grows.
The same sequence has worked in local-government digitalisation: a narrow scope, to show results before a bigger decision is made.
IT systems and process inventory2–6 weeksA register of applications with owner, contract, licence, cost and end-of-support date. A map of processes and integrations. A risk register against KSC, NIS 2, e-Doręczenia and KSeF. A one-page summary for the board and the council.The full scope of the service
Digitalisation strategy and purchasing rulesTimeline set after the first conversationA three-year roadmap split into regulatory obligation and investment. A budget split into investment and maintenance, ready to defend before the council. Purchasing rules introduced for system purchases — before the first request for quotations goes out.
Preparing for the tenderTimeline set after the first conversationA requirements specification, a purchasing matrix to compare offers, questions to ask vendors, and taking part in vendor meetings as the contracting authority’s representative.
Digitalisation advisorOngoing advisory roleFor an agreed time commitment, for example a fixed pool of hours per month and a regular meeting with the secretary. Acceptance against agreed test scenarios, reviews of further purchases, keeping track of legal changes and the Ministry of Digital Affairs’ plans, preparation for the next wave of regulation — and when a bigger budget is needed, preparing the board for the conversation with the council about the necessity of the spend, and presenting that justification alongside it.
2008–2026Local government
“The same operating model in every local government office — the same budget processes, public registers, departmental structure, procurement regime and regulatory pressure.”
18 years working with local governments on the strategy and architecture of a unified information-exchange platform that forms a genuine e-office. Over 40 modules designed and implemented, including: EZD, e-archive, e-board, e-council, e-calls for applications, e-recruitment, public consultations, e-business travel, e-training, councillor support, 12 public registers and two web portals. About 20 years of experience delivering projects for public administration and business.
What I hear from county offices before we start.
Recurring, anonymised themes from dozens of conversations about digitalisation — not quotes from any specific office.
“We have a dozen or so systems, and no one sees the whole picture — until something breaks or an audit arrives.”
“We know the IT budget is too low, but it’s hard to justify to the council without hard data on risk and the cost of doing nothing.”
“We’re more afraid of migrating years of archived data than of the new system rollout itself.”
“We’d rather see how it works in a similar office than take a sales presentation’s word for it.”
What public offices ask most often.
From what date must the office have an EZD-class system?
The Ministry of Digital Affairs has announced the EZD-class system requirement; according to the ministry’s explanations from October 2026, the deadline has been pushed back to 2029 at the earliest, and the regulations are still only a draft, so we confirm the legal position at the start of the inventory. According to NASK’s schedule, development of EZD PUW ends in 2029, but that is a separate matter from the deadline of the obligation. More important than the date itself: migration is the moment to review the entire document-flow architecture, not just move data.
Does the KSC Act (NIS 2) apply to our county office?
Yes. The amended National Cybersecurity System Act, in force since 3 April 2026, explicitly lists the county office as a key entity, as it does a municipal office with at least 50 employees; smaller offices and organisational units are important entities. The Act gives 12 months to implement the obligations, and the head of the office is personally responsible for them, even when they are delegated to someone else. A systems inventory is the first practical step: without a list of systems, their owners and risks, the rest cannot be planned.
Does the office have to roll out KSeF, even though it’s mainly a system for businesses?
As a VAT payer that issues and receives invoices, the office is subject to the same rules as any other entity — so the obligation also applies to local-government bodies, for their business activity. The key question isn’t “whether” but “how to integrate KSeF with the existing invoice workflow and the finance system”, so it doesn’t become yet another application silo.
How do we write a tender specification for an IT system to avoid vendor lock-in?
The key is to require the following clauses at the specification stage rather than negotiate them later: the right to your data and to export it in an open format, a described exit plan, open APIs, and in justified cases, source-code escrow. Without this, switching vendors a few years later means either losing data or being forced into an expensive continuation of the contract.
Where do we start digitalising the office when we have neither the time nor the in-house expertise?
With a small, time-boxed step that gives hard knowledge instead of another statement of direction — in practice, with a systems and process inventory, which takes 2–6 weeks and ends with a one-page summary for the board, not a months-long strategic project with no tangible outcome.
How do we accept a system from the contractor?
Acceptance should be based on test scenarios and criteria written into the tender documentation and the contract, not on a general impression. Before signing the acceptance report, check data migration, integration with the finance system and other registers, documentation, and staff training. Record any issues in the acceptance report with a deadline to fix them. A system is easiest to accept when the acceptance criteria were written together with the requirements.
How do we prepare a digitalisation strategy for the office?
The strategy should follow from what the office already has, not from a vendor’s catalogue. It starts with an inventory of systems, contracts and processes, then sets the target architecture, standards (such as a permissions model and requirements-documentation rules) and a roadmap split into statutory obligations and investments. A good strategy says what to do in the next budget and in what order, so the treasurer and the council can see the justification for the spending.
Let’s start with the inventory, before an audit does it for us.
