Case Studies

What actually happened, told as it happened

Two engagements, walked through end to end: the problem on the ground, what Arjava did about it, and the result the client saw.

Oil & gas pipeline EPC contractor, 32+ projects across 10+ states

Shanti Infraconstruct

Problem: A ₹12,00,000 material quote at one site looked like the going rate, since there was no easy way to check it against purchase history from other sites.
What we did: Arjava's vendor rate history flagged a cheaper vendor already in the system's records. A landed-cost check added transport costs and confirmed it was still the better deal.
Result: ₹3,30,000 saved on a single purchase order (about 27.5%), caught automatically before the money was spent, with a full audit trail showing why.

Key takeaway: A price is only as good as what you can compare it against — centralizing purchase history turns hidden savings into the default decision.

Before Arjava, approvals could take up to three days because everything moved through people manually. Now it's down to a few hours, and I can see all of our sites from one dashboard instead of chasing updates over the phone.

Ankur Singh

Ankur Singh, Director, Shanti Infraconstruct

Read the full story

Client-reported, not independently audited.

Water, wastewater & environmental engineering, 25+ years, 400+ projects

S.S. Engineering Works

Problem: Procurement, stores, site execution, and billing were all coordinated over Excel, phone calls, and WhatsApp, so discrepancies between plan and actual stayed invisible until year-end reconciliation.
What we did: Arjava mapped the tender-to-billing lifecycle end to end and rolled it out module by module: procurement, inventory, projects, approvals, and dashboards.
Result: Roughly ₹1 crore in discrepancies surfaced by the audit trail, ₹14 lakh a month saved on a live build, and purchase approvals dropped from 3 days to same-day.

Key takeaway: Cost leakage is usually a visibility problem, not a discipline problem — once procurement, stores, and billing can be seen together, money that was already being lost becomes visible and stoppable.

Read the full story

Client-reported, not independently audited.

Honest Comparison

Arjava vs Freelancers vs Large Agencies

Not every partner delivers the same outcome. Here's how the factors that decide a project's success actually compare.

FactorFreelancerLarge AgencyArjava
Implementation timeline8–16 weeks, variable3–6 months4–6 weeks*
Pricing modelHourly — unpredictableHourly/retainer — expensiveFixed price*
AI-assisted developmentRarelySometimesEvery project*
Progress visibilityAd hocWeekly at bestDaily updates*
Source code & data ownershipContract-dependentOften retained by vendorAlways yours*
ERPNext / Frappe expertiseRareExtra-cost add-onCore specialty*
Delivery reliabilitySingle point of failureTeam-based, layeredDedicated team*
Post-launch supportOften noneAMC, ~15–25%/yrIncluded window*

Freelancer and agency figures reflect published industry benchmarks (Clutch and GoodFirms software development pricing guides, and Frappe/ERPNext certified-partner implementation data). *Arjava figures are placeholders pending confirmation.