A construction payment management application that helps general contractors, owners, and subcontractors simplify and automate the draw process. Reduces risk by securely managing lien waivers and compliance. Increases visibility to downstream payments to minimize the risk of disruption and ensure the entire supply chain is paid on time for work completed.
N/A
Pricing
Oracle Textura Payment Management
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Oracle Textura Payment Management
Free Trial
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Oracle Textura Payment Management
Considered Both Products
Oracle Textura Payment Management
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Oracle Textura Payment Management
Textura experience in the specific space of subcontractor management gives them an advantage over Procore though Procores cohesiveness in end to end management is a benefit. The continued relationship with Textura is a good one and also a benefit they share with Procore who …
Currently, we use Textura if our GC requires it. If we implement Textura for OUR subs, it will be b/c we are familiar with the product and see how it works for our GC's.
Oracle Textura Payment Management is better and more refined than similar products. Procore has a ton of other useful features and GCPay is straightforward with a simple UI. Like most things in tech, it comes down to user base and Oracle Textura Payment Management has the most …
For a GC that wants to make things easier for both the themselves and all subs, this is absolutely the best solution out there. Some GCs still approve changes using purchase orders rather than change orders and allow invoicing to occur at any time during the month However, they should change their process to align with Oracle Textura Payment Management's draws. Without a draw process and confirmed invoice submission along with ACH payments, we have had invoices lost, payments lost, and time lost from having to track all of it. I can't think of a reason it would not be appropriate.
Signatory workflow - Logging into the signatory and notary in the same process. There isn't as much separation as there could be.
We could use a place to put in our job number. Running reports to ensure we billed everything in our system matches what's in Textura isn't easy because there are different job names.
If our authorized signer inadvertently fails to execute the application and the GC closes the draw period, it appears as though the pay application was never submitted. From what I can see, there is no clear audit trail reflecting that it had been prepared or pending signature prior to the draw closing.
It has a great user interface that is regularly being updated and improved. The platform is intuitive and the product team regularly engages with an industry partnership team to make sure it is staying up to date with the way our users expect the tool to perform. They also have the backing of Oracle's robust user base and UI teams
Currently, we use Textura if our GC requires it. If we implement Textura for OUR subs, it will be b/c we are familiar with the product and see how it works for our GC's.