Database management skills of the staff were weak and there were pressures to reduce costs.
The system development process was complex and risk-prone. The focus of the new information system was to manage flow and water demand information. Data exchange between different stakeholders of the project was not fully automated as their information systems were not designed for data and information exchange among other stakeholder agencies.
The implementation process of KOBWA happened at a time when roles were yet to be assigned to the new staff. The paper and spreadsheet based processes had to be shifted to computer-based systems gradually for ease of functions in the operations. Deficiency of staff also presented a hurdle in the implementation process.
Manual processes were used for preparing regular reports on the water quality status as the graphical display routines designed for checking flow data could not be leveraged for examining water quality data. Map displays were also documented manually. A close connection between the water quality data and the GIS databases was desired for raising water quality status maps. Getting the data from field, DWAF, MNRE, and other data suppliers was again a manual process realized through spreadsheets or text export files from different agencies and transferring them into Hydstra™.
There was good scope of committing errors due to non-automation of the processes; it needed many resources on checking data in the database. As manual processes required staff which was deficient, resources had to be employed for comprehending the reactionary change in the water quality with flow and long & short term routines. It could affect the standard and utility of the information as precious time got wasted in database maintenance and preparing status reports