ERP Strategic Assessment Update May 2018 Hank Schottland | ERP - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

ERP Strategic Assessment Update May 2018

Hank Schottland | ERP Steering Committee |

Cabinet requested an assessment of our ERP Strategy in mid-2016. We formed a steering committee later that year and an executive stakeholder committee in 2017.

• Steering committee: Tammy Billick, Jody Potter, Loraine Schmitt,

Andy Freed, Tonya Booker, Bonny Vosu, Julie Kinney, Samantha Hopf, Cheryl Scott, Dieterich Steinmetz, Mike Arnold, Hank Schottland

• Executive stakeholder committee: Sylvia Kelley, Jim Langstraat,

Lisa Bledsoe, Mark Goldberg, Eric Blumenthal, Karin Edwards, Rob Steinmetz, Katy Ho, Michael Northover

ERP Strategic Assessment

Goal of the Assessment

• Recommend whether to remain on our decades-old

“Banner ecosystem” (40+ apps), and invest to modernize it,

• r initiate an effort to replace it
• Assess current state & potential future state
• Consider the business implications (risk/reward, costs,
• rganizational impacts) associated with either path
• Outline the high-level path forward

ERP Strategic Assessment

Banner

Access DB Adobe Creatve Suite Advisor Track Agilys AIM Alma / Ex Libras Appli- cant Tracker Argos Asset- works Aviso

BanWeb

Base D2L (Desire to Learn) E- Builder Enroll- ment RX Enterp. Sky Equi- tract Excel Grad Plan Image- Now In- Design Jump MBS Org Sync Pay- metric Print- shop Pro QAS Pro Qual- trics RAVE Resrce 25 25 Live Sales Force SAS SQR

Symme- try Access

Tablea u Team Dyna- mics

Terra- dotta

Touch- net Tutor Track

Vantose

Visio

Our Ecosystem: Dependencies / Integrated Programs

Over 40 external programs interact with Banner in one way or another

Activities during Summer 2017:

• Engagement with PointB consultants
• They conducted district-wide outreach to assess current state

from the users’ perspective: 46 teams interviewed, ~200 staff

• Asked:

○ what was and was not working ○ desired future state ○ concerns about change

ERP Strategic Assessment

ERP Strategic Assessment: Pain Points

Challenges % Mention

Reporting / Analytics 85% Integration 73% Intuitive / ‘Clunky’ 73% Memorization / Depend on Others 69% Not User-Friendly 65% Work flow/Tracking 62% Manual/Paper Processes 54% Training 50% Dependency on IT or IE 46% Customization / Ad Hoc Changes 42% Error Notification 42% Too many steps/screens 38% System Performance / Stability 38%

Challenges % Mention

Naming Protocol/Consistency 35% Access/Rights 31% Student Relevance 31% Productivity 27% Work-Arounds 27% Duplication 23% Outdated Technology 23% Processes 23% Multiple Browser Requirements 19% Communications 19% Documentation 19% Real Time data 19%

ERP Strategic Assessment: What’s Working; Ideal World; Concerns about Change

Good % mention

Data Integrity 31% Custom reports 19% Know how to work the system 8% Portal 8%

“Perfect World” % mention

Dashboard / Tabs 35% Modern 31% Mobile 15% Imaging 8% Single sign-on 8% Change Concerns % mention Data Conversion 38% Training 38% Won't be better 35% Losing what's working 27% Learning curve 23% Time 19% Culture 15% Resources (lack of) 15%

Status Quo

• Continue using our existing installation of Banner and supporting

applications, and build it out with additional “bolt-ons” (NC Registration; CRM; student on-boarding, planning, scheduling; employee on-boarding/off-boarding; budget planning and management; …)

New ERP

• Select a new cloud-based software-as-a-service (SaaS) ERP

application, plus a new reporting solution.

ERP Strategic Assessment: 2 Major Options

ERP Strategic Assessment: Risks & Impact

Staying w/ the Status Quo: high risk

• Cannot support strategic initiatives

moving forward

• Knowledge leaving the institution
• Expensive to maintain
• Significant productivity loss (“50%”)
• Vendor support issues
• Branding / Student Recruitment
• Employee Satisfaction

Moving to a New ERP: high impact

• Massive Change
• High Cost
• Culture Shift
• Process redesign
• Perceived loss of power and/or

control

Solution Options & Decision Factors

Options Capability Cost Strategy Enablement Flexibility Adapatability Vendor Support & Viability Org Readiness Sustainab ility Initial Invest. TCO Status quo New ERP

Positive Moderate Challenging

ERP Strategic Assessment: Costs

Annual Costs Licensing, Hosting and Application Support for Each Option Option 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Status Quo* low low low low low low New ERP high high high high high high Implementation Costs Option Costs Status Quo low New ERP high

* Hosting, application support, and disaster recovery costs are not included in Status Quo Implementation costs include the vendor’s professional services costs and the cost to bring in full-time temporary PCC staff during the implementation. Caveats:

• The costs for all three options are high level estimates. They would need to be refined during a formal

software selection project.

• The ‘Status Quo’ option is expected to be much higher than the currently provided estimate, once DR

and future hardware replacement costs are added in.

• Point B’s scoring categories included over a dozen factors

(capability, cost, strategy enablement, flexibility, vendor support & viability, user interface, workflow…) for “core ERP” incl. finance, budget, HR, student info, financial aid

• Evaluated Ellucian, CampusManagement, Jenzibar, Unit4,

Workday

• Workday scored highest, followed by Campus Management,

Unit4, Jenzabar, then Ellucian

ERP Strategic Assessment: Vendor Options

PCC Staff:

• We would need to allocate subject-matter experts to the project on a full-time

basis and backfill them, including SMEs in Finance, HR/Payroll, IT, Academic & Student Affairs, Institutional Effectiveness. Similar to what has been done for Bond projects.

• Other PCC staff would need to participate on a part-time basis during key design

and business process re-engineering discussions, as well as some validation testing at the end. Non-PCC Staff:

• The implementation will require a significant number of non-PCC employees.

○ System integrator (SI) - most of the consulting $$ would be spent here ○ 3rd party firm to help manage the project to provide a Change Management, Project Manager and other leadership roles if needed - a critical role

Staffing a New ERP Project

PCC Should Adopt a New ERP with a Phased Approach The majority of the challenges with the status quo will not be resolved without re- implementing Banner or spending a significant amount on customizations. Netting out all factors, a new ERP, phased in over multiple years, would best meet PCC’s strategic needs. Phase I

• Human Capital Management (HCM) – foundational layer and tends to be the most

mature component of cloud-based ERPs

• BI / Analytics

Phase II

• Finance – builds on top of HCM.

Phase III

• Student Information Services (SIS) including Financial Aid – tends to be the least

mature component at this point in time

PointB’s Recommendation

✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

• 2. SCOPE

.

PCC leaders aligned around the need, level of investment and vision for success ‒ ERP Needs and Implementation Strategy defined ‒ Business Case & Level of Investment Understood ‒ Alignment on case for change ‒ High Level Roadmap Created Functional leaders understand priority areas of scope and the measures used to define success ‒ Identification of Functions & Major Processes in Scope ‒ Key Successes Measures for Business and Organizational Performance ‒ Program Organization Defined The enterprise has evaluated products & SIs and made their selection and contracted with vendors ‒ Product Selected ‒ SI Selected ‒ Defined ROI ‒ Defined Budget ‒ Detailed Program Plan for all Work streams ‒ Deployment Strategy Confirmed Business finalizes their design is ready to validate new ways of working across people, process and technology ‒ Test Data in Place ‒ Design finalized ‒ System Configured ‒ Training and Audience Specific Communication Complete ‒ Go Live Criteria Confirmed The business has validated that quality has been achieved in test environments and is ready to transition ‒ Test Cases Executed ‒ Go Live Criteria Met ‒ Transition and Training Team Activated People and processes are smoothly transitioned to a new platform and new ways of working ‒ Go-live plan successfully executed ‒ Training Conducted ‒ Go Life Performance Metrics realization ‒ Organization has transitioned to new way or working The business fully owns the solution and is optimizing performance to realize ROI ‒ Transition to Sustaining Operations ‒ ROI / Success Realization ‒ On-going optimization roadmap and health checks

• 1. ALIGN
• 4. SELECT
• 6. TEST
• 7. DEPLOY
• 8. OPTIMIZE

The business begins to understand how new technology will improve the way work gets done & prepare for change ‒ Current State Process Documented ‒ Future State Process Design ‒ Future State Role and Organizational Design

• 3. PRELIMINARY

DESIGN

• 5. REFINE & BUILD

HIGH LEVEL RECOMMENDED NEXT STEPS FOR EACH PHASE OF PCC’S ERP PROJECT & EXPECTED OUTCOMES

✓

Complete

NEXT STEP: Go / No Go Decision and Receive Funding

✓ ✓

High Level PCC ERP Implementation Roadmap Example

16

Fall

Note: References to specific years & terms are just for illustrative purposes.

Steering Committee Perspective

• PointB did exactly what we asked them to do and did it well
• Migrating to a new cloud-based ERP makes sense
• it would be an expensive project
• also, a major change-management challenge for PCC
• Several benefits were under-played: cost-savings, pain-reduction,

strategy-enablement, D/R benefits

• Many other systems currently in the pipeline and more on the way...an

ERP project will be a very large additional initiative

• The college would need to support a new ERP project as a major

strategic initiative, recognizing that it may crowd out other initiatives during the long implementation period

• “If not now, when?” There will never be a perfect time to do this and it

will get increasingly expensive the longer we wait.

Follow-on Activities

• Additional vendor discussions on functionality and

“budgetary pricing”

• Discussions about funding options

Banner 9

• What is Banner 9?
• Why the move?
• Timeline