Transcript PowerPoint Template

The West Virginia ERP Story – Part 1
NASACT
August 12, 2014
Introductions
Glen Gainer, III
Auditor
State of West Virginia
Phone: 304-558-2251
Daniel Keene
Vice President
State and Local Government ERP Solutions
Phone: 703-267-8827
Email: [email protected]
Greg Smith
Vice President
Phone: 978-244-6324
Email: [email protected]
2
Topics
•
•
•
•
•
•
Project background
Initial challenges
How we addressed the challenge
wvOASIS ERP solution
Lessons learned
Questions
3
3
Project Background
Business Case
• West Virginia has disparate, redundant, unsupported systems
supporting mission critical back office needs
• Business case justifies implementation of the largest IT system in
the State’s history:
– $110 Million, 8 year project (3 implementation + 5 support)
– Streamlines business processes eliminating redundant activity
– Integrates key financial data across the State improving
business decisions and transparency
– Replaces financial, human resource, time and attendance,
payroll, budgeting, purchasing, and linear asset management
system across the State
– 50,000 employees, $23.4 billion annual budget
4
Initial Challenges
•
•
•
•
Governance
Scope
Project Timeline
Staffing
Initial Challenges
Governance
•
Project sponsored by three independently elected officials
–
–
–
•
•
Transition to new Governor during ERP procurement
Consequently…
–
–
–
–
•
Governor
Auditor
Treasurer
Significant angst due to enormity and visibility of project
Compounded by lobbyists spreading fear, uncertainty, and
doubt
Legislation created new ERP Board of the 3 sponsors
whose organizations previously operated independently
Budget projections decreasing largely due to price of
natural resources
As a result…
–
–
Project progress was affected due to delayed decisions
Approval of deliverables requires additional time
6
Initial Challenges
Scope
• Scope
– Unprecedented scope and scale
– 10% of RFP requirements were
not met
– 375 additional
requirements/new business
processes surfaced during
the project
– RFP requirements did not
always accurately capture
state’s real need
• As a result…
– Fit/Gap Analysis required more
time to complete
– Anticipated significant change to
planned software enhancements
(some removed, some added)
7
7
Initial Challenges
Timeline
• Initial project timeline mandated by RFP to level the playing field
• Timeline was risky
– No capacity for additional scope
– Contract started two months
later than assumed
– Deployments close together in
rapid succession
– Inadequate time for stabilization
– Financial go-live not at start of
fiscal year
•
As a result…
– A new project timeline was required
8
8
Initial Challenges
Staffing
•
Progress project hampered by
– Decentralized current business processes require multiple SMEs to come together to define
new centralized business processes
– Lack of State SMEs available
– Slow ramp up of State and consulting resources at the start of project
– Consultant turn-over
– Resource conflict caused by concurrent phases
•
As a result…
– More State agency SME participation was required
– Initial progress in defining requirements took longer
than expected
– Facilities for project proved inadequate
9
9
How WV Addressed the Challenge
Daniel Keene, CGI
10
10
How We Addressed the Challenge
•
•
•
•
Governance
Scope
Project Timeline
Staffing
11
How We Addressed the Challenge
Governance
•
Project sponsored by three independently elected officials
–
Sponsors’ offices took a more active role in governance process supporting the change
to the plan and sending strong message of commitment
More frequent board meetings
–
•
•
•
•
All three sponsors were re-elected which provided stability and continuity for
the project
Developed a strong Enterprise Readiness team to
provide communication and coordinate
deployment activities with 171 agencies and
boards
Cost of scope increase and revised schedule less
than projected by the business case
As a result…
•
Decisions and deliverable approval are
accomplished in a more timely manner
12
How We Addressed the Challenge
Scope
• Scope was finalized
• Scope of project increased
• Incorporated high ROI functionality
– Federal Reciprocity (TOPS
program)
– Capital Program Mgmt.
System to manage federal
STIP (Statewide Transp.
Improvement Program)
• As a result…
– Meets the objectives of the business
case
– Defined a solution that will improve
the state’s ability to conduct state
business
– A new timeline was required to
deliver the functionality
13
13
How We Addressed the Challenge
Timeline
• Timeline was revised
– Plan allows for adequate time
for stabilization between
deployments
– Advantage Budgeting brought
up early to align with the 2015
budget cycle
– FM go live aligns with start of
fiscal year
– HR/Payroll go live aligns with
start of calendar year
– DOT given more time to
prepare
• As a result…
– More achievable with less risk
14
14
How We Addressed the Challenge
Staffing
• Staffing continues to be a
challenge for both the state and
its partners
• State is looking to add between
20-40 part-time and full-time
employees to the project
• State is looking at improved
facilities to accommodate this
growth
• As a result…
– Budgeting went live as scheduled
on August 5, 2013
– Other phases are tracking to plan
15
15
wvOasis ERP Solution
Greg Smith, Kronos
16
16
wvOASIS ERP Solution
17
17
Lessons Learned
Glen Gainer, III
Auditor, West Virginia
18
18
Lessons Learned (so far)
Active governance participation needed for success – a good
structure is not enough
Change management is critical to success – not just system user
population – organization and even project team
Push back hard on software changes – say no to changes to
address “possible problems” or low risk “what if scenarios”
19
Lessons Learned (so far)
Analysis paralysis will doom a project – “a bad decision is
better than no decision”
Fit Gap results are the true measure of what’s needed –
the RFP and vendor proposal are only leading indicators
Commit the right staff to the project and deliver the staff
20
Questions?