<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>idea Improving Esri Enterprise Agreement Flexibility for Local Governments: A Proposal for More Customizable User Types in ArcGIS Enterprise Ideas</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-enterprise-ideas/improving-esri-enterprise-agreement-flexibility/idi-p/1261115</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello everyone,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am the Manager of IT &amp;amp; GIS for a small municipality with a population under 10K. Currently, we have around 70 employees and are looking to implement ArcGIS Enterprise using enterprise solutions such as ArcGIS Field Maps and Survey 123.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As a small local government, we face budget constraints when it comes to IT spending. In order to optimize our budget, I believe it would be helpful if Esri could provide more flexibility in their enterprise agreement with local governments.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Specifically, I would like to propose the ability for local governments to choose a total of different user types, rather than being limited to a fixed number of "Creator" user types. While we may not need a large number of Creator user types, we may require a greater number of Field Workers or Editors.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Currently, the cost for each user type varies, with 1 Creator User Type costing approximately the same as 1.4 Field Workers User Type or 2.4 Editor User Type.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For instance, a small local government might not need 50 Creator user types, but would instead benefit from a combination of 10 Creator, 28 Field Worker, and 48 Editor user types.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I believe that having this flexibility in the enterprise agreement would allow us to allocate our budget more effectively and ultimately save our taxpayers' money.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you agree with this idea, please support it and help us to make a case to Esri for greater flexibility in their enterprise agreements.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.esri.com/t5/state-local-government-questions/improving-esri-enterprise-agreement-flexibility/m-p/1260746" target="_blank"&gt;Improving Esri Enterprise Agreement Flexibility fo... - Esri Community&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for your time and consideration.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2023 20:42:40 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>rsun_TQB</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2023-02-23T20:42:40Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Improving Esri Enterprise Agreement Flexibility for Local Governments: A Proposal for More Customizable User Types</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-enterprise-ideas/improving-esri-enterprise-agreement-flexibility/idi-p/1261115</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello everyone,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am the Manager of IT &amp;amp; GIS for a small municipality with a population under 10K. Currently, we have around 70 employees and are looking to implement ArcGIS Enterprise using enterprise solutions such as ArcGIS Field Maps and Survey 123.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As a small local government, we face budget constraints when it comes to IT spending. In order to optimize our budget, I believe it would be helpful if Esri could provide more flexibility in their enterprise agreement with local governments.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Specifically, I would like to propose the ability for local governments to choose a total of different user types, rather than being limited to a fixed number of "Creator" user types. While we may not need a large number of Creator user types, we may require a greater number of Field Workers or Editors.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Currently, the cost for each user type varies, with 1 Creator User Type costing approximately the same as 1.4 Field Workers User Type or 2.4 Editor User Type.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For instance, a small local government might not need 50 Creator user types, but would instead benefit from a combination of 10 Creator, 28 Field Worker, and 48 Editor user types.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I believe that having this flexibility in the enterprise agreement would allow us to allocate our budget more effectively and ultimately save our taxpayers' money.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you agree with this idea, please support it and help us to make a case to Esri for greater flexibility in their enterprise agreements.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.esri.com/t5/state-local-government-questions/improving-esri-enterprise-agreement-flexibility/m-p/1260746" target="_blank"&gt;Improving Esri Enterprise Agreement Flexibility fo... - Esri Community&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for your time and consideration.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2023 20:42:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-enterprise-ideas/improving-esri-enterprise-agreement-flexibility/idi-p/1261115</guid>
      <dc:creator>rsun_TQB</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2023-02-23T20:42:40Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

