Post on 15-Nov-2014
description
transcript
D E F I N E D I S C U S S F U N D I N G I M P L E M E N T A T I O N
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Colleen Armstrong, Pueblo Community College (Banner ERP)Rochelle Daniels, Midlands Technical College (DataTel ERP)Andrea Halder-Giles, Colorado Community College System (Banner ERP)Kathy Kaoudis, Red Rocks Community College (Banner ERP)Diane Snyder, Alamo Colleges (Banner ERP)
ERP Defined
Defined: ERP is a decision making system that maintains, houses and reports all
resources such as student, financials and human resources of college operations, to include Federal and State reporting. Self-contained ERP systems integrate with other tools.
Why Implement ERP? Business systems historically have been comprised of silos of information with
limited to no integration. This limitation has made it next to impossible to provide full integration of data allowing for comprehensive data flow to provide a full picture of the institution.
Key Benefits Empower employees to have integrated self service capabilities. Reduce the number of technologies required in a company. Old technology may no longer be supported. Streamline processes, increased internal control, improved customer service. Return on Investment (ROI) – can’t quantify.
2
ERP Components
A true ERP integrates information technologies to remove the silos by allowing information to flow between and through organization units including information for: Financial/Accounting (General Ledger, Payables, Purchasing) Human Resources Information Payroll Budget Management Data Warehousing / Research Industry Specific Data – for example, in Higher Education:
• Student Information Systems (Recruiting, admissions)• Financial Aid• Foundation
Access Portals
Higher Education ERP Vendors – Banner, Datatel, Peoplesoft, SAP
3
ERP Characteristics
Integrated Information Flow.
Seldom are ERP systems Developed In-House.
Organizations therefore enter into a long term relationship with a vendor and they give up some control of their independence.
Unique business processes tend to be handled as add-ons to base packages thereby inducing significant expense for companies.
Most 3rd party applications do not interface well with ERP solutions inducing additional costs and extended implementation timelines.
Implementation schedule for 100% ERP modules
Turn-up by module (1 to 3 years)
1-2 years post ―go-live‖ to fully realize benefits of process re-engineering
4
ERP Change Management
Leadership and Project support. Message must be consistent and supportive.
President and Board of Trustees integral in setting the tone for need to implement ERP solution.
Buy-in from operational teams/collaborative.
The change in technology may require substantial training for functional users who perform the majority of the work.
Not just an IT project; system belongs to functional users Re-engineering all processes; not just bringing up a software system
Communication of the ERP Project Cycle steps Set User Expectations.
Reduces anxiety over process changes.
5
ERP Project Cycle Steps
1. Business Process Study
2. Pre-Implementation Training
3. Requirements Analysis
4. Fit/Gap Analysis
5. Business Mapping Report
Set ERP Objectives
Assists with collecting input for spec preparation
Sets user expectations of product features & limitations
Defines user requirements
Identifies gaps between baseline system capabilities & user requirements
Follow on to Gap Analysis
Identifies solutions to each gap
Re-engineering/process map
Master Data preparation/mgmt
6
ERP Project Cycle Steps
6. Project Plan
7. Software Initialization (Initial)
8. Customization of Forms and Reports (Initial)
9. Migration of Historical Data
10. Design of Routines and Workarounds
Task Milestones
Roles and Responsibilities
Ensure infrastructure adequate
System checked for complete processes on each transaction type
Defines user requirements
Beginning Balances
Detail Historical Data Access
Includes Data Clean-up (A/R, A/P, Student)
Identified in business mapping and in fit/gap analysis
7
ERP Project Cycle Steps
11. Setup and Configuration
12. Testing Environment
13. End User Training
14. Final System Walk-through
15. Go-Live
16. Post Support
User Acceptance Testing
Used for initial user training
On set-up, configuration, transaction processing and report generation
Sample transactions entered in testing environment
Sign-off phase where project is finally implemented
On-going schedule of regular training
To address turnover/retraining; as well as new features/modules
8
Technology Needs
Technology is an enabler. Business practices are to be considered with IT requirements and revised as
necessary to meet the needs of the institution.
ERP’s are not technology projects; they are business projects that integrate technology and technology personnel.
Do not let technology drive ERP Project- Let business needs drive the project.
Need WEB, Database, Internet, and Client Server Technologies.
A significant hardware investment in new technology and thinking is a must. Reliance on old technology or technology staff who only knows legacy technologies will be very risky. Invest in system architects who have vision and focus.
Limit ERP system modifications – negatively impacts future releases.
9
Funding
Budget allocations must be made to anticipate total cost to promote, train, implement, purchase supplies, travel, for conversion, copying services, software, hardware and contingencies.
When planning budgets, it is most important to slightly over estimate to allow for the unanticipated or additional design specifications.
Depending on the size of the institution, down payments or partial payments may be made.
Costs can range b/w $5M to $30M depending on # of modules implemented and level of external assistance hired (consulting & training)
10
Planning the Project - Staffing
Plan adequate staffing: You will need to add significant staffing over a long period of time to design, configure, test, provide quality assurance, and train on new job processes.
Establish Project Team and structure Project Sponsors and Stakeholders to set the direction. Overall project managers (IT and functional) for each module. Team leads for each function within each module. Team members – experienced employees from each of the functions as well as
representative of locations. Alamo Colleges: added approx. 20 temp. employees to free up experts for 24
months during implementation
At all times ensure that you have enough staff, the right vision and spend time selecting vendors who are long term partners.
BACKFILL, BACKFILL, BACKFILL
11
Planning the Project - Timing
Realistic scheduling based upon staffing selected consider busy times of year for business
expect the project plan to evolve as more is learned
Time, resources, money triangle
– which can you afford to spend?
12
Planning the Project – Process Mapping
Flowchart the current state processes.
Development of the desired future state business processes - regardless of the enabling technology.
Uniting the processes at various locations – forces policy and procedure development.
Identified changes to policy/procedure must be supported by management.
13
Planning the Project –Testing & Data Cleanup
Define and document the Testing Plan.
Extensive Data Clean-up required Student: eliminate duplicates
Purchasing Vendor records
Accounts Receivable
The larger the system migration, the messier the data
Be thorough!
14
Training
Critical Component on both the Front End and Back End of the Project Cycle
Must be scheduled regularly. Include ―old‖ previously implemented modules as well as ―new‖ modules/releases as ERP system is upgraded over time
Initial Sessions – User’s First Impression of Implementation Success or Failure
Training needs to include features that will engage all learning styles and provide practical exercises in using features—should not just be a lecture
Needs to address needed changes in business practices identified as a result of Business Process Mapping and Fit/Gap Analysis
Should provide users with ―Best Practices‖ they can carry back to their job
15
Alamo Colleges – Case Study/Overview
Background: In 2004/2005, began implementing Sungard’s Banner modules (Finance,
Student, Financial Aid, and Payroll/HR).
Finance module implemented then project halted; IT Director and implementation Partner let go.
What went wrong?
Lack of adequate planning, staffing or realistic timeline.
Failed to reengineer processes.
Project Re-Launch in 2009: New Project to clean-up issues on Finance and turn up HR/Payroll,
Student and Financial Aid over next 18 to 24 months.
Focus:
Business Process Analysis to redesign processes end-to-end.
Leveraging on out-of-the box Banner functionality.
Streamline yet enhance controls (paperless where possible).
16
Alamo Colleges – Case Study/Significant Change
Shift from 5 colleges/separate databases & processes to:
Single course catalog
Common forms/processes
Implementing enhanced workflow with scanned documents & approval queues (payroll/HR; Purchasing & A/P, etc)
Linkage to management reporting system
Totally redesigned Chart of Accounts
Implementing Data Standards and scrub existing data
Single online registration/payment that can be accessed from District or college sites
17
Alamo Colleges – Case Study/New Approach
Staffing: Dedicating experts from each department for 18 to 24 months is critical to our success; all members go through Banner system training and Project Mgmt training up-front.
Process mapping.
Planning and managing the implementation including governance structure to ensure hard decisions are made and visibility to metrics to assess project progress.
Documenting ―best-practice‖ processes standard across all colleges; with no Banner customizations; but optimal configuration.
Developing robust training documentation that is Process oriented (i.e how to register…) rather than system focused.
Communication is throughout – about project team governance structure to bubble up issues so that decisions get made, to ensuring team staffing includes cross-mix of users/departments that enhances communications and better processes being developed, to project communications broadcast both pre and
post conversion.
18
Survey Results19
Short survey was emailed directly to approximately 200 professionals nationwide
Both 2 and 4 year institutions were surveyed
Schools were asked to provide FTE data
28 responses received~15% response rate
Respondents were Finance, Administrative, and IT professionals
Results available to all attendees:
Please email Kathy Kaoudis to request
20
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
16 10 100.0% 26
0 0 0.0% 0
26
0
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 1
For comparison purposes
only, please provide the
skipped question
No (thank you, please exit survey)
Yes (please continue)
Has your college started a new ERP (Enterprise Resource Program computer system) implementation in the
last 10 years?
answered question
Answer Options
21
22
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
3 1 15.4% 4
4 1 19.2% 5
4 1 19.2% 5
2 2 15.4% 4
3 2 19.2% 5
0 3 11.5% 3
26
0skipped question
Answer Options
25-36 months
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 2
answered question
19-24 months
10-12 months
6-9 months
Longer than 36 months
How long did you initially plan to implement all modules?
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
13-18 months
23
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
5 6 42.3% 11
11 4 57.7% 15
14
26
0
No
Please comment on how long you think it takes to implement each module,
from planning to go-live.
answered question
skipped question
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 3
Was the length of time you initially planned to implement all modules realistic?
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
Answer Options
Yes
24
25
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
3 8 42.3% 11
13 1 53.8% 14
0 0 0.0% 0
0 1 3.8% 1
0 0 0.0% 0
0
26
0skipped question
Answer Options
Payroll
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 4
answered question
Human Resources
Student
Finance
Other (please specify)
Which module did you implement first?
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
Financial Aid
26
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
6 2 32.0% 8
9 8 68.0% 17
25
1
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 5
skipped question
No
Yes
After your initial implementation, did you have to re-implement any portion of the original ERP?
answered question
Answer Options
27
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
5 1 85.7% 6
3 1 57.1% 4
1 1 28.6% 2
3 0 42.9% 3
0 0 0.0% 0
0 0 0.0% 0
1 0 14.3% 1
0 0 0.0% 0
2
7
19
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 6
answered question
Eliminated modules from the initial ERP Plan.
Human Resources Module
Finance Module
Other (please specify)
Changed chart of accounts.
Financial Aid Module
If yes, please specify which portion(s) you had to re-implement:
skipped question
Implemented third party solution provided by a different vendor.
Payroll Module
Answer Options
Student Module
Two year
institutionFour year institution
X
X Luminus
Had to re-implement the AR detail codes for banner finance since
we implemented this before finance.
Other (please specify)
28
29
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
3 8 42.3% 11
13 2 57.7% 15
26
0
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 7
skipped question
No
Yes
Did you hire additional staff to support existing staff when working on the ERP Implementation?
answered question
Answer Options
30
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
12 1 54.2% 13
2 3 20.8% 5
1 3 16.7% 4
0 0 0.0% 0
0 0 0.0% 0
0 2 8.3% 2
24
2skipped question
Answer Options
11-15 FTE
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 8
answered question
6-10 FTE
1-2 FTE
Did not add additional staff
More than 15 FTE
How many additional staff did you hire during the implementation period?
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
3-5 FTE
31
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
7 4 45.8% 11
1 2 12.5% 3
4 1 20.8% 5
3 1 16.7% 4
0 0 0.0% 0
0 1 4.2% 1
7
24
2
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 9
Additional comments that apply to this question:
6-10 FTE
More than 15 FTE
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
Did you lose qualified staff who chose to retire rather than retraining on the new
system?
3-5 FTE
answered question
Answer Options
11-15 FTE
skipped question
1-2 FTE
Did not lose staff
32
33
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Staff losses were due to job changes, not retirement. Job changes were not due to lack of desire
to retrain, but new staff required additional training.
Some people become so focused on job tools, rather than job performance, that they loose sight of
the purpose of the job tools in the first place
Additional comments that apply to this question:
My college didn't lose staff, but the central IT department and some other colleges in the system
did see retirements.
Too soon to assess.
This is an estimate of staff lost across the entire campus.
I did not lose staff in my department but across the university we did lose staff.
Not determinable
34
Answer OptionsTwo year
institution
Four year
institution
Rating
Average
Response
Count
Finance Nightmare 3 0
Poor 5 2
Ok 5 4
Good 3 3
Excellent 0 1
2.50 3.30 2.81 26
Student Nightmare 1 0
Poor 9 3
Ok 4 4
Good 2 1
Excellent 0 0
2.44 2.75 2.54 24
Fin Aid Nightmare 0 0
Poor 4 1
Ok 6 5
Good 2 2
Excellent 0 0
2.83 3.13 2.95 20
HR Nightmare 0 1
Poor 2 2
Ok 7 3
Good 5 1
Excellent 1 1
3.33 2.88 3.17 23
Payroll Nightmare 1 1
Poor 2 1
Ok 7 3
Good 4 2
Excellent 2 1
3.25 3.13 3.21 24
Overall: Nightmare 1 0
Poor 7 2
Ok 6 4
Good 2 2
Excellent 0 0
2.56 3.00 2.71 24
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 10
How would you rate your overall implementation experience? (Please consider only the initial, planned
implementation.) Items were rated on a scale of 1-5 where 5 is Excellent.
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
35
20,000 FTE or
more
10,000 -
19,999 FTE
5,000 - 9,999
FTE
2,500 - 4,999
FTE
Less than
2,500 FTE
Response
Percent
Response
Count
1 3 5 1 5 60.0% 15
2 4 2 1 1 40.0% 10
25
0skipped question
Two year institution
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 11
Four year institution
For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your
institution:
For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution:
answered question
Answer Options
36
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
0 3 11.5% 3
16 7 88.5% 23
0 0 0.0% 0
0 0 0.0% 0
0 0 0.0% 0
0
26
0skipped question
Answer Options
SAP
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 13
answered question
Oracle
Sungard SCT Banner
People Soft
Other (please specify)
Which ERP system did you implement?
DataTel
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
37
Response
Percent
Response
Count
4.5% 1
9.1% 2
22.7% 5
9.1% 2
9.1% 2
45.5% 10
22
6
Up to $499,999
For comparison purposes, please let us know how much you spent on your initial ERP implementation.
Please include the direct cost of the ERP package(s) and consulting you purchased. Do not include
indirect costs such as staff time, the cost of existing staff, or other costs not directly charged by your
software provider.
$20,000,000 or more
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 14
$2,000,000 - $4,999,999
skipped question
Answer Options
$10,000,000 - $19,999,999
$500,000 - $1,999,999
answered question
$5,000,000 - $9,999,999
38
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
3 4 28.0% 7
0 1 4.0% 1
1 3 16.0% 4
0 1 4.0% 1
0 0 0.0% 0
12 0 48.0% 12
25
1skipped question
Answer Options
9-10
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 15
answered question
6-8
2-3
Single campus only
More than 10 campuses
If you are part of a college or university system, how many campuses were implemented as part of your
initial ERP implementation? Please include the number of campuses for the cost you specified in Question
4-5
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
39
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Percent
Response
Count
0 0 0.0% 0
13 8 84.0% 21
3 1 16.0% 4
0 0 0.0% 0
0 0 0.0% 0
0 0 0.0% 0
1
25
1
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
X IT Staff
Other (please specify)
For comparison purposes only, please provide the
following data on your institution:
ERP Implementation Survey
Other (please specify)
Procurement professional
Student services professional (Fin Aid Director or Advisor, Registrar, Admissions Advisor, Counselor, etc.)
Please tell us about yourself. I am a:
IT professional (CIO, VP of IT, IT Project Manager, Database Administrator, etc.)
answered question
Answer Options
Institutional research professional
skipped question
Finance professional (CFO, VP of Finance, Business Officer, Controller, Assistant Controller, Bursar, etc.)
College administrator (President, VP of Student Services, Dean, etc.)
40
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
Response
Count
12 7 19
19
7
Two year
institution
Four year
institution
X
X
X
X
X
I'm not sure there is anything we could have done differently except perhaps REQUIRE Sungard to assign
experienced consultants and limit one consultant to one module AND to not switch consultants half-way through the
implementation. The major problems we had in the student module is due to bad information we received from the
conultants. Once we saw the damage that was done, we were on our own to fix it! The Finance and Payroll module
implementation was very smooth because we had one consultant who was there from start to finish.
I would have set up separate Banner systems at each College and fed information to a central location instead of a
central system trying to serve all Colleges
Take more time in planning. Have all of the reports available before go-live. Hire to backfill positions while we
concentrated on the planning and implementation.
Response Text
Take a different job!
Better identify necessary reports and files and have SCT write them if necessary as part of the package. No file for
TIAA remittances, no State tax reports or files for each state format, for example.
Commit them to include setup for specific workflows. Need better coordination between their staff - we went live
with duplicate people records since consultants each do things 'their way', different checking process, etc.
If you could do it all over again, what would you do differently?
skipped question
Answer Options
ERP Implementation Survey-Question 17
answered question
For comparison purposes
only, please provide the
41
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
ERPs are never easy to implement and the fact that our system has been able to do it is quite an accomplishment!
Many companies start out strong, get frustrated, and end up quitting before the implementation process is
complete.
obtain appropriate level of commitment from sr. mgmt. communicate, communicate, communicate...
I would stagger the related products' implmentation so that we would have more time to digest the training and
understand the systems. I would push out implementing ODS, COGNOS, and Workflow.
Backfill positions, carry out more detailed business process analysis, formalize testing and documentation,
implement finance before student, financial aid, HR or payroll, state funding.
Taken a more realistic look at the viability of the initial implementation schedule. Worked more at getting top
management involved from the beginning.
Spend more time on the planning side which would likely result in less time on the cleanup side and hopefully
reduce staff time and stress levels. We should have hired some additional staff to help out but it is hard to use
current staff to teach new people when they are supposed to be relieved to work on implementation. Just better
planning in general would have made for a more positive experience--I guess you learn from your mistakes!
Implement finance first and do a better job on leadership for the student implementation. There was really no one
"in charge" during that implementation unlike the others. Also, make sure the IT staff is solid. One problem during
the student implementation is a weak and realitively new IT staff. They were pretty well trained by the later
implementations. By the time we got to HR we really had the process nailed down.
Hire back fill staff to cover the jobs of managers during implementation. We did hire some part-time help, but not
enough. During the 3 months prior to go-live 100% of time needs to be focused on the implementation project to
make it truly sucessful. Also, make sure IT has enough staff to continue to support and troubleshoot the first
module implemented while still working to implement other modules.
Hire managers in that knew something about ERPs, not allow people to manage just because they had "time in" the
institution. Decisions were poorly made, rouge programmers were calling the shots, and when new programmers
were hired with outside ERP and reporting experience they were treated as a threat, not an asset.
Try to have more fun
Thorough "Fit Gap" analysis
Spend more time up front prior to implementation to assure everything was ready and working correctly
Involve end users more fully in the planning phases Insist on supplemental staffing to support implementation
teams. Include staffing on the implementation team to fully document decisions and new procedures.
I would have delayed the Grants billing module.
ERP Implementation42
Questions?