Date post: | 27-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | nathan-reid |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 0 times |
Panelists
52%ORGANIZATONS THAT HAVE RECENTLY MODERNIZED
69%EXPECTING OREXPERIENCINGPROJECT DELAYS
● Survey results were almost identical for both state and local government ERP implementations
● Customizations did not meet desired expectations
● 32% of organizations have Shelf-ware – Modules purchased but never implemented
● Additional Lessons Learned & Recommendations:● Minimize Software Modifications - Limit
customizations to Regulatory Requirements● Don’t purchase software licenses until you plan to
implement the capabilities● Stay current with your Vendor’s Software
Releases● Demand Accountability from Software
Vendor/Integrator• Software Bug vs. Enhancement• Beware of ‘Works as Designed’
Perspectives from the
Panelists
State of Alabama
Update: Segmented Approach
● In 2011-12 identified segmented concept focused on greatest need and opportunity for improvement
● Follow the money:● Personnel Cost $2.4B● 40,000+ employees
● Use a best of breed/best of fit approach
● Time & Attendance opportunity● Front end interfaced with current payroll
system ● Standardization
● Considerable Amount of Effort, Time, and Money Required to Maintain State's Current Time and Attendance Processes
● Time And Leave Reporting Errors More Likely
● Labor Law Compliance Risks ● Extensive Use of Paper and Distribution
Cost● Lack of Labor Analysis and Scheduling
Tools 9
● Control and Reduce Overtime● More Accurate Leave Reporting,
Scheduling and Processing● Ensure Labor Law Compliance ● Provide Employee Self Service Facility
(Portal)● Support Automated Workflow and
Online Approvals● Better Secure Employee Information● Provide Ability to Support Future
Requirements 10
● Kronos Contract Signed March 2013● Software● Implementation Services● Time Clocks
● Statewide T&A System● State Employees and Vendor Team ● Phased Implementation ● 24 Months
● Permanent Support Team ● Sustain System, Training, Upgrades
11
Efficiency Gains and Cost Reductions:● Automated Workflow Review and Approval● Replaces Current Paper Based System● Greater Accuracy● Reduction of Labor Wages ● Increased Control over Employee Overtime ● Elimination or Reduction of Paper Documents
12
State of Florida
● Lack of a Governance structure● Governor controls procurement and HR● CFO controls financials and treasury
functions● State does not have a vision/strategy
on how core systems would integrate:● Procurement – Ariba● Human Resources – SAP● Financials – PeopleSoft● Treasury – PeopleSoft
● Lack of standardization resulted in 280 customizations
● Leadership did not understand the impact of significant Project Modifications made in second year of the project (guaranteed a two year extension for the project)● Significant change in software version
that was to be implemented● Changed Chart of Accounts structure
● Significant number of stops and starts for the testing phase – ultimately led to decision to suspend project
● Establish a stronger governance structure
● Develop a business case that recommends a strategic vision for the state
● Establish an independent project that focuses on Organizational Change Management
● Recommending a longer (8-10 years) approach, with several short-term goals that can be achieved during an administration’s 4 year term
Commonwealth of Virginia
National Associationof State Comptrollers
David A. Von Moll, State [email protected]
March 21, 2013
Commonwealth of VirginiaCardinal Project
●Department of Accounts (Comptroller’s Office) and Department of Transportation (VDOT) Partnership
● Both needed to replace non-upgradable legacy financial management systems
● IT governance initiatives sought to reduce agency-based administrative systems
● VDOT had funding and agreed to meet statewide requirements as initial step towards statewide base system implementation
●Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) – PeopleSoft
● VDOT decommissions heavily customized PeopleSoft version 6.0
● Comptroller’s Office will decommission 30 year-old statewide legacy system by 2016
●Modern Technology Platform● Essential first step towards providing needed business
functionality to agencies and optimize benefits of full ERP solution so that select agency-based administrative systems can be retired and related systems support cost savings can be realized
20
Year Cardinal Project Timeline/Activities
2004-
2005
VDOT Financials replacement project planning
Develop ERP business case - administrative system duplication/redundancy, legacy system risk
Analyze available ERP software packages - decision to implement PeopleSoft
2006
Original ERP Plan – $318 million total for Financial Management/Budgeting, HR/PR, Purchasing
Governor requested $30 million to get started (e.g., establish PMO, define system requirements)Just $11 million appropriated by General Assembly
2007
“Plan B” – original ERP Plan project scope narrowed to Financial Management/Budgeting
Completed system requirements definition and RFP planning
2008
Cardinal Plan – Economic downturn resulted in no additional funding for Plan B in Governor’s introduced budget
Strategy to partner with VDOT developed
2009
RFP for software and integration services, Accenture and Oracle contracts established
2010
VDOT, Accounts and Accenture work on Cardinal Part 1
2011
Successful go-live date for VDOT (Part 1) – December , 2011
2012
Successful go-live date for Accounts (Part 2) – October, 2012
2013
Statewide rollout (Part 3) planning and kick-off
21
Part 3Statewide RolloutEnterprise Base
System
Rollout:•Wave 1 – 148 Cardinal-only agencies, 469 users (Oct, 2014)•Wave 2 – 130 interface agencies, 1,290 users (Feb, 2016)
• Retire Legacy Financial System (CARS)
Part 1VDOT
Functions in Scope:•General Ledger•Accounts Payable•Accounts Receivable•Project Accounting•Procurement•Time and Attendance
• New Statewide COA
• 5,000 End Users Trained
• Retire FMSIIDeployed December
2011
Part 2Comptroller’s
OfficeEnterprise Base
System
Functions in Scope:•General Ledger•Accounts Payable•Limited Accounts Receivable (Funds Receipt)
• Enterprise Base System scope limited to current functionalityDeployed October
2012
● Gaining Executive Support● Emphasize risk mitigation versus
savings/efficiencies● Manage expectations of cost savings and
functional improvements● One step at a time on savings from agency system
elimination
● Count on roadblocks, setbacks and delays● Patience/ persistence, incremental progress, leverage
● Unique advantages of COVA approach● Partnership
● Leverage VDOT “project” and funding capacity● Proof-of-concept for complex business requirements
● Risk aversion and cost smoothing● Limited functionality of initial enterprise rollout● Phased approach
22
Questions for the Panelists