AIEE.DEVSOQ TMS CRD
HomeExport PDFOverview

Contents

/
  • 1.1Overview
  • 1.2About AIEE.DEV
  • 1.3Parties & sign-off
  • 2.1Plan SOQ-25K
  • 2.2Max claim (EDG)
  • 2.3Rate card
  • 3.1Discovery pack
  • 3.2Brand & website appendix
  • 4.1Attachment A
  • 4.2PRD
  • 4.3Solution overview
  • 4.4Registration
  • 4.5Admin
  • 4.6CRM & sales
  • 4.7Student & trainer portals
  • 4.8SWDA & finance
  • 4.9Platform
  • 4.10Chat agents
  • 4.11Ops modules
  • 4.12Business benefits
  • 4.13DSMR research
  • 4.14Build vs buy
  • 4.15Market & competitors
  • 5.1Project control plan
  • 5.2Prototype & screens
  • 5.3Capability roadmap
  • 5.4UI/UX
  • 5.5Frontend
  • 5.6Backend
  • 5.7Architecture
  • 5.8Tech spec
  • 5.9Directory structure
  • 5.10Handover pack
AIEE.DEVSOQ TMS / Coding Requirement Documentation
4.14 / 4.14 Build vs buy
Pei Han CCO / Eddy CPO / HK CSO / Andy Koh CTOaiee.dev4.14 / Confidential
4. Requirements4.14 Build vs buy
Section 4.14

Why Our Software Beats DSMR

Battle card for SOQ TMS by AIEE.DEV — where we win, where we respect DSMR, and how we fight on product.

The fight in one line

DSMR is a mature Singapore funded-training suite (D-TRENO + D-COLTO + D-GENIO + GATCOMS + ai.HumanCapital).
SOQ TMS by AIEE.DEV is a purpose-built platform for SOQ’s diploma + short course + WSQ reality — with modern UX, CRM/sales, Xero, and SWDA-native architecture — without locking SOQ into a five-product enterprise sales motion.

We do not pretend DSMR is weak on government integration. We win by being better fit, better ownership, better economics, and better product clarity for SOQ.


Scoreboard — SOQ decision criteria

Fit score for SOQ (illustrative)

0–100 relative strength on SOQ priorities — not a vendor benchmark lab

compare
DSMR suiteSOQ TMS (AIEE.DEV)

SOQ diploma + exemption fit

5592

CRM + commission + Privyr

4088

Xero finance boundary clarity

5090

UX simplicity (portal count)

4585

IP / source ownership

3595

SWDA depth today

9070

AI proctoring depth

8835

Price transparency

3090
CriteriaDSMRSOQ TMS (AIEE.DEV)Winner for SOQ
SWDA / TPGateway funding depthProven in marketBuilt as Hub from day 1; parallel-run to conformanceTie -> DSMR today / us after conformance
Fit to SOQ diploma + exemption rulesGeneric / SI customNative (18-month configurable exemption, offers, Student 360)AIEE.DEV
CRM + sales commission + PrivyrNot headline productIn core Admin WorkspaceAIEE.DEV
Xero as finance SoRSAGE-class customNamed Xero boundary in designAIEE.DEV
UX / portal model5 branded products3 apps (Admin / Student / Trainer)AIEE.DEV
Self-serve ops speedEnterprise demo salesPhased MVP -> funded -> CRMAIEE.DEV
Source code / IP ownershipVendor SaaS / licenceSOQ owns deliverables (contracted)AIEE.DEV
Roadmap controlVendor roadmapSOQ backlog priorityAIEE.DEV
Pricing transparencyOpaque enterprisePublished packages + regional rate cardAIEE.DEV
AI proctoring depthD-GENIO strongPhase-later / partnerDSMR (for now)
Grant-agency GATCOMS portalUniqueNot required for SOQ ATP roleN/A for SOQ
Talent matching (ai.HumanCapital)StrongOut of SOQ v1 scopeDSMR (not SOQ priority)

Why we are better (attack lines)

1. Built for SOQ — not adapted from a vendor suite

DSMR sells a horizontal suite to many ATPs. SOQ needs diploma admissions, module exemptions, Privyr, sales commissions, Xero. Those are first-class in our backlog — not change-request afterthoughts.

2. One product, three surfaces — less lock-in theatre

Five trademarks (TRENO/COLTO/GENIO/GATCOMS/HumanCapital) creates mental and commercial complexity. SOQ staff get one Admin Workspace with modules — same data, one Student 360, one funding status.

3. SWDA Hub as a product — not buried API glue

We isolate the 40+ API reality into a dedicated Integration Hub with retry, idempotency, ops dashboard, and audit. That is how you survive SWDA API churn without rewriting the whole TMS.

4. Finance done correctly

TMS owns pricing, subsidy, exemption, orders. Xero owns GL. Clear boundary = fewer month-end fights. DSMR can integrate finance; we design the boundary into the MTS.

5. Modern stack -> faster change

Next.js + typed APIs + event workers. AIEE.DEV ships with an iterative weekly delivery cadence. SOQ gets weekly visible progress — not quarterly black-box SI drops.

6. Honest economics

Pure Singapore SI burn for this scope can exceed S$800k–S$1.8M+ loaded. AIEE.DEV hybrid (SG lead + local-rate VN/TW build) targets S$280k–S$550k full suite — see 2.3 Pricing. Same SWDA bar; better cost-to-outcome.

7. Own your destiny

With AIEE.DEV build, SOQ can own IP / escrow / long-term fork options (as contracted). Vendor SaaS means roadmap and pricing power stay with DSMR.


Where we respect DSMR (and how we close the gap)

DSMR strengthOur response
Years of TPGateway conformancePhase 2 parallel-run; treat SSG/SWDA docs as acceptance tests
D-GENIO proctoringPhase later or partner module — do not block MVP
ISO 27001/27701Security controls from day 1; certification is SOQ-led post-handoff
Brand trust with government buyersWin SOQ on fit + delivery proof; case study becomes our trust

Elevator pitch (use this)

“DSMR is a strong funded-training suite. SOQ does not need five products and an opaque SI quote — SOQ needs a Training Management System that runs diploma, short courses, and WSQ with SWDA, CRM, and Xero in one design. AIEE.DEV builds that system with Singapore architecture leadership, regional engineering economics, and a phased path that gets SOQ live without waiting for a vendor roadmap.”

Recommendation

Do not buy DSMR to “be like DSMR.” Benchmark them. Build SOQ TMS where SOQ’s requirements exceed a generic suite — then beat them on ownership, UX clarity, CRM/finance fit, and total cost.

4.13 DSMR research4.15 Market & competitors

aiee.dev / Confidential

AIEE.DEV