# IT Advisor for Municipal Utilities: KSeF, System Choice | Krogis

Źródło: https://krogis.pl/en/spolki-uzytecznosci-publicznej
Język: en
Opis: Invoice workflow under KSeF, integration with finance and accounting, digital personnel files. An independent review of your IT project before you sign, for district heating, water utilities and public transport.

---

# KSeF, document workflow, e-Doręczenia, a new ERP. *Each of these projects changes how people work.*

Krogis advises municipal companies (district heating, water utilities, public transport and ports) on the changes that IT projects bring: the invoice workflow for KSeF, integration with the finance and accounting system, e-files, electronic signatures, ERP replacement. I help put them in a single order, prepare managers and staff in the office and in the field, independently assess offers before the supervisory board (what will integrate with the finance and accounting system, what it really costs over five years, how to compare two offers against the same criteria) and check after the rollout whether people really are working differently. For district heating companies, water utilities, public transport operators and port companies.

[Book a call](mailto:wojciech.kroczak@krogis.pl?subject=A%20conversation%20about%20digitalisation%20at%20the%20company) [See what you get](https://krogis.pl/en/spolki-uzytecznosci-publicznej#co-dostaniecie)

- I reply within 2 working days
- First call: 30 minutes, no charge
- No commercial ties to vendors

A

**Detail A** network fittings **Municipal company** district heating · water utility · public transport **Sheet 1** illustrative photo

**Wojciech Kroczak** Change management and digitalisation advisor. 2019–2026: public utility companies.

## Change management in a municipal company. *Typical projects and what they change in people’s work.*

In a municipal company, change affects the office and the field staff at the same time, and responsibility is shared between the management board, the supervisory board and the owner.

### KSeF and the invoice workflow

**What changes for people:** invoices arrive electronically, and they are coded and approved in the system rather than on paper passed between departments.

**Typical difficulty:** some of the people who approve invoices are rarely at a desk, so the new path has to fit their working day.

**What I focus on:** an approval path that fits field work, cover for absences, department heads as the first recipients and a check after go-live on where invoices get stuck.

### Document workflow, e-files, electronic archive and electronic signature

**What changes for people:** documents and personnel files live in the system, and signing and archiving no longer need binders.

**Typical difficulty:** being used to paper and the fear that “it will get lost in the system”.

**What I focus on:** what we simply scan and what we actually change in the process, which departments go first and who in the company keeps things in order after the rollout.

### Replacing the ERP or a line-of-business system

**What changes for people:** almost everyone’s work changes: accounting, the warehouse, billing and customer service.

**Typical difficulty:** the comfort of the old system and people’s own spreadsheets, which the new system loses to unless someone has planned for it.

**What I focus on:** preparing department heads, training on the company’s own data and a review after 3–6 months of whether people really are working in the new system.

### e-Doręczenia and electronic proceedings

**What changes for people:** letters and proceedings with statutory deadlines move entirely to electronic channels.

**Typical difficulty:** with statutory deadlines at stake, people prefer the tried-and-tested way and are afraid of making a mistake.

**What I focus on:** a clear procedure, cover for absences and a simple cheat sheet for people who do this rarely.

**KSC and NIS 2.** District heating companies, water utilities and public transport operators are typical entities covered by KSC. The obligations fall on the company’s board; I help break them down, keep vendors on track and prepare the company for the audit. [KSC from the board’s side](https://krogis.pl/en/uslugi/koordynacja#ksc)

[What change management is and why it pays off](https://krogis.pl/en/zarzadzanie-zmiana)

## Questions worth knowing the answer to.

I put them to presidents and board members of municipal companies before they sign a contract. If the answer to any of them is “we don’t know”, that is exactly where I can help.

1. **Will the new system work with our finance and accounting system and with invoice workflow under KSeF?**
2. **What will the system really cost us over five years, including maintenance and the exit from the contract?**
3. **Has our IT department’s recommendation been compared with an independent opinion?**
4. **Who in the company is responsible for changing the processes, and not only for the installation?**
5. **What will we present to the supervisory board as the justification for the choice?**

**The cost of a mistake.** A low starting price is often smaller than the cost of annexes, of integrations added after signing and of maintenance over the following years. 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.*

- **A second, independent opinion before you go to the supervisory board** Alongside your own IT department’s recommendation, with the risks and options set out in writing.
- **The real cost over five years** Licences, rollout, maintenance and changes — not just the starting price.
- **Finance-system integration without contract amendments** Integration requirements written down before the contract is signed, not after.
- **A team that will adopt the system** Change management: communication, training, change champions in each department.
- **Less risk of mistakes** The questions worth asking before the decision is taken, not after.

## You have IT. *That doesn’t mean you are in control of the decision.*

A municipal or port company usually has its own IT department and a capital budget — yet decisions on the direction of digitalisation are taken on the strength of a single recommendation, with no external check on risk, cost or alternatives.

### KSeF and invoice workflow (already in force)

Mandatory structured e-invoicing through KSeF (the national e-invoicing system) requires integration with your existing finance and accounting systems, not just the purchase of a new module.

**From the inventory:** a finance-system integration matrix and a list of the systems that must exchange data with it.

### Integration with the finance system and ERP (the first point of contention in every project)

Integrating a new system with the existing finance system is the most common flashpoint — the question is “can we make it connect?”, not “should we replace everything?”.

**From the inventory:** the integration requirement written into the specification from day one, not tacked on as an amendment after signing.

### Digital personnel files and further modules (contract workflow, requests, employee records)

Each new module either plugs into what you already have or becomes yet another application silo that the company pays for twice.

**From the inventory:** A/B/C/D categories and the order of rollouts.

### KSC / NIS 2 (infrastructure operators)

Many public utility companies, particularly in district heating, water supply and transport, fall within the scope of the amended National Cybersecurity System (KSC) Act, even though they operate as commercial companies.

**From the inventory:** a systems register and a risk register.

### ERP as the backbone, not as everything (vendor pressure: “we’ll do it all in one system”)

A large, integrated ERP sounds safe, but it can turn into one big dependency on a single vendor, with no agility and no room for newer technology. There is no single right answer: it depends on the company’s business model and size.

**From the inventory:** what stays in the ERP and what is better carved out as a separate, well-integrated system.

### An IT department without the authority to enforce (the head of IT knows what to do, other departments don’t cooperate)

The head of IT identifies the need but has no authority over other department heads to secure their cooperation — what is missing is leverage, not knowledge.

**From the inventory:** a mandate from the board for an external advisor to gather what the IT department needs.

### Two offers in front of the board (a decision worth a large share of the IT budget)

Without a common comparison matrix, you end up comparing like with unlike, and the winner is the better presentation rather than the better offer.

**From the inventory:** comparison criteria agreed before the vendor meetings, not during them.

## The request says “an invoice system”. *The goal is often broader.*

Before the company buys another module, I ask why, and what will count as success. It often turns out that behind the request for a single system lies a process that needs sorting out first, with the tool coming only as the second step.

1. The request“We need an invoice-workflow system for KSeF.” The actual need - an orderly purchasing policy: from requisition, through order and contract, to cost invoices, - clear rules for approvals and vendor management, - integration with the finance system planned from the outset, not added through an amendment after signing.

## Is this your situation? *Four things worth knowing before the first conversation.*

### What often points to it

It happens that the supervisory board asks about cost and risk, while the management board has a single recommendation, from its own IT. Integration with the finance and accounting system often only comes to light after the contract is signed. KSeF, e-Doręczenia and document-flow projects are frequently run by different vendors.

### What may happen if you put it off

Annexes and running costs often keep growing, because the starting price does not show the five-year cost. Replacing the ERP or the invoice workflow can slip when the vendor wrote the requirements. The board then decides without a second, independent opinion.

### Who is usually the sponsor

Usually the president of the board or the board member responsible for finance, working with the head of IT.

### What I don’t do

I don’t replace the IT department or step into its remit, and I don’t sell systems. The decision stays with the board and the supervisory board.

**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.

## IT projects are only visible as a whole once someone pulls them together. *The board and the supervisory board want a single picture.*

KSeF, integration with the finance and accounting system, an ERP replacement and further modules are run by different people and different vendors. The IT department can be small, and coordination gets whatever time is left after keeping the systems running.

I bring together in one place what is scattered today: projects, deadlines, dependencies, decisions and vendor commitments. On the company’s side, and without stepping on the IT department’s responsibilities.

- One up-to-date list of projects: green, yellow or red status, an owner and the next deadline.
- Collecting statuses from the IT department, the business departments and vendors, and keeping track of what each vendor has promised.
- A register of risks and decisions: what is waiting for the board and what happens if the decision is not made.
- A short monthly or quarterly report for the board, ready to present to the supervisory board.
- The IT department remains the owner of delivery and maintenance. I coordinate the information; I don’t replace it.

[Scope of project coordination and keeping projects in order](https://krogis.pl/en/uslugi#doradca)

## What the board sees after 2–6 weeks.

One page for the CEO and the chief accountant, a presentation for the board meeting and a full set of documents for talks with vendors.

One-page summary for the board

**The company’s systems: current state and recommendation** 6 of 11 systems

- Finance and accountingChief accountantno API for KSeFB
- Cost-invoice workflowFinance departmentpaper and e-mailD
- Billing and customer accountsCustomer servicecontract until 2029A
- HR and payrollHRno digital personnel filesB
- Network records (GIS)Technical departmentsupport ends 2026C
- Complaints and requestsCustomer servicespreadsheetD

**1** to keep **2** to adapt **1** to replace **2** gaps

**Recommendation:** invoice workflow as an integration with the finance system for KSeF, not a new system. Digital personnel files as the second step, on the same process platform.

**Sheet 2** document template **Scale 1: the board** one pageExample. Illustrative data; the document layout is real.

### Board presentation, 12–15 slides

Outline draft. A 60–90-minute session is included in the price.

1. **Goal and scope of the inventory.** What we took stock of, and what we deliberately left out.
2. **Map of the company’s systems.** Owner, annual cost, end of support, links to the finance system.
3. **A/B/C/D categories.** What to keep, adapt, replace, and what’s missing.
4. **Integrations with the finance system.** What exchanges data today and what is re-keyed by hand.
5. **Invoice workflow under KSeF.** An option integrated with the finance system and a new-system option, each with its 5-year cost.
6. **Risks and their weighting.** A register of 20 risks with a heat map, including KSC/NIS 2 and vendor dependency.
7. **Decision options.** Realistic options and their consequences for operational continuity.
8. **Criteria for comparing offers.** One matrix for all vendors.
9. **Recommendation and schedule.** The first three steps and who owns them.

[The full list of 16 documents and tools](https://krogis.pl/en/inwentaryzacja#co-dostaniecie)

| Your plan | What the board gets | Risk it addresses |
| --- | --- | --- |
| **Invoice workflow under KSeF** | A finance-system integration matrix, requirements for the specification, an integration option and a new-system option with the 5-year cost. | Yet another application silo next to the finance system, amendments to pay for integration, double data entry. |
| **Integration with the finance system and ERP** | The integration requirement written into the specification from day one, questions for vendors. | Discovering after signing that “it can’t be connected”, and having to replace a system nobody wanted to replace. |
| **Digital personnel files and further modules** | A/B/C/D categories, a rollout order, a change-management plan. | Resistance from staff at the outset, and modules that don’t talk to each other. |
| **Supervisory board and owner** | A one-page recommendation, offers compared against standardised criteria, the total cost over 5 years. | A decision taken “on the strength of the presentation”, and questions about its basis after the event. |

Quote after a call

Depending on the number of systems and departments. I confirm the exact price after a 30-minute call about the size of your company.

- **2–6 weeks** from signing the contract to the board session, 1–3 days of work on site, and about 10 hours of your coordinator’s time.
- **No commercial ties** to vendors of line-of-business systems and platforms — an A/B/C/D assessment free of conflicts of interest.
- **A confidentiality agreement before the start.** All deliverables in editable formats, with a perpetual licence for the company.

## What’s in it for the CEO, the chief accountant and the IT manager.

### CEO

Decides on IT projects on the basis of their own IT department’s recommendation — and needs a second, independent opinion before signing, not after the event.

**Receives:** a one-page recommendation and two decision options with their 5-year cost, ready to present to the supervisory board.

**Outcome:** a decision they can defend before the supervisory board.

### CFO, chief accountant

Responsible for integrating new systems with the existing finance and accounting system — usually the first and toughest point of contention in any project.

**Receives:** a finance-system integration matrix and requirements that can be written into the vendor contract and enforced.

**Outcome:** predictable costs and integration without contract amendments.

### IT manager or IT director

An ally when an independent review backs their recommendation with figures and board-level arguments — not a competitor taking over their role.

**Receives:** a systems register, a repeatable methodology and board-level arguments for their own recommendation.

**Outcome:** independent confirmation of their own recommendation.

## An independent opinion alongside your IT department’s recommendation, *not instead of it.*

The same way of working proved itself in the digitalisation of a container terminal: an external, independent voice at the board table, alongside the expertise of the company’s own IT department, not in place of it.

1. 2–6 weeks **IT systems and architecture inventory** A register of systems, integrations and dependencies, with particular focus on the finance and accounting system and its links. A/B/C/D categorisation and a risk map. A one-page summary for the board. [The full scope of the service](https://krogis.pl/en/inwentaryzacja)
2. Per project **An independent review of the project and its integrations** Before the board approves the IT department’s recommendation: a second opinion on risk, total cost and alternatives. Pointing out where other companies in a similar position overpaid because they did not anticipate integration, data migration or resistance from staff. When the CEO has an idea but no time to write it up, a 15–20-minute conversation is enough for me to come back in about 2 days with a finished concept for review. [How it works](https://krogis.pl/en/biznes)
3. Timeline set after the first conversation **Preparing for vendor conversations** A comparison matrix for two (or more) offers against common criteria, questions to put to vendors, and attending meetings as the board’s representative — so that the decision put to the CEO rests on comparable data, not on how persuasive a presentation was.
4. Ongoing advisory role **Digitalisation advisor** Attending vendor meetings, giving an opinion on further projects in parallel with your IT department’s recommendation, and an up-to-date view of where similar companies have overpaid for decisions on cloud, APIs or automation.

1. A district heating company **Invoice workflow with OCR and KSeF integration** The legal department at the same organisation now has a digital archive of procurement proceedings, invoice workflow with OCR, KSeF integration and a legal-support module, delivered as successive projects, each building on the last, using the same mechanism: the board sets out its intent, Krogis turns it into action. [See how it went](https://krogis.pl/en/biznes#przyklad)
2. 2018–2026 **A container terminal** “The same way of working as in the digitalisation of the container terminal — an independent voice for the board alongside the expertise of the company’s own IT department, not instead of it.” A CRM system for the customer-service and sales teams, built on a process platform: contacts, website enquiries, offer calculation and preparation, complaints, still in use today. Identifying objectives, analysing requirements and developing the concept for a stakeholder relationship management system. Experience of digitalising a large infrastructure operator.
3. 2019–2026 **Public utility companies: district heating, water utilities, public transport** Design, implementation and launch of a collaboration and business process management platform covering, among other things, a digital archive of procurement proceedings, a digital cost-invoice workflow, digital personnel files, correspondence management and legal support.

## What I hear from district-heating, water-utility and public-transport companies.

Recurring, anonymised themes from conversations about digitalisation — not quotes from any particular company.

> “Before we go any further, I need to know whether this will connect to our finance system at all — everything else is secondary.”

> “We always put two offers side by side in front of the board — we need someone to help us compare them fairly, not just pick the more polished presentation.”

> “Even when a process is automated, I want a real option to make the decision manually when I think it’s necessary.”

> “We don’t want to be treated like a public body — we’re a company, and we weigh risk and results differently from a public office.”

## What companies ask most often.

### How do we integrate a new system with the existing finance system without replacing everything?

In most cases it can be done through an API or a dedicated integration, as long as the integration requirement is written into the specification from day one rather than tacked on through an amendment after the contract is signed. It’s one of the most common sticking points in IT projects at municipal companies — and one of the easiest to address in advance.

### Does a municipal company (district heating, water utility) fall under the KSC Act (NIS 2)?

Yes. Under the amendment in force since 3 April 2026, a company performing public-utility tasks is covered by the Act at least as an important entity, regardless of its size. District heating, water supply or transport may additionally qualify it as a key entity in its sector — that is worth checking case by case. Operating as a commercial company does not exempt it from the obligations.

### How do we objectively compare two IT vendor offers in front of the board?

You need a common criteria matrix — functionality, architecture and openness, security and compliance, technology and vendor, total cost — agreed before the vendor meetings, not during them. Without it, you often end up comparing like with unlike, and the winner is the better presentation rather than the better offer.

### Does a commercial company have different digitalisation obligations from a public office?

Yes. The logic of the Commercial Companies Code differs from that of public administration: the decision horizon is different, so is the pressure on financial results, and some obligations (public procurement, for example) may not apply to a company to the same extent as to a public office. That is why communication with, and advice to, municipal companies should be in business language — risk, cost, continuity — not administrative language.

### How do we check whether the savings a new-platform vendor promises are real?

You need to calculate the total cost of ownership over several years — licence, implementation, maintenance, training, integration — and compare it with the actual cost of your current, fragmented systems, not with the list price they had years ago. A general claim that one platform will save money usually falls apart once the numbers are done.

### How do we prepare the company for an ERP or billing-system rollout?

First, list what the new system has to work with: the finance and accounting system, the KSeF invoice workflow, technical systems and customer service. Decide who in the company makes decisions about processes, and write down the requirements, including integrations, before you start talking to vendors. Compare offers in a single matrix and on total cost, and base acceptance on agreed test scenarios.

## Let’s start with a conversation about your next IT project.

[Write to: wojciech.kroczak@krogis.pl](mailto:wojciech.kroczak@krogis.pl?subject=A%20conversation%20about%20digitalisation%20at%20the%20company) [Call: +48 516 401 658](tel:+48516401658)

- I reply within 2 working days
- First call: 30 minutes, no charge
- Nothing to prepare beforehand