Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)

on

  • 1,473 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,473
Views on SlideShare
1,472
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
67
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.slideshare.net 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Presentation Transcript

  • Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) DEFINE DISCUSS FUNDING IMPLEMENTATION 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 2 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.
  • ERP Components 3 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
  • ERP Characteristics 4  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
  • ERP Change Management 5  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.
  • ERP Project Cycle Steps 6 1. Business Process Study  Set ERP Objectives 2. Pre-Implementation Training  Assists with collecting input for spec preparation  Sets user expectations of product features & limitations 3. Requirements Analysis  Defines user requirements 4. Fit/Gap Analysis  Identifies gaps between baseline system capabilities & user requirements 5. Business Mapping Report  Follow on to Gap Analysis  Identifies solutions to each gap  Re-engineering/process map  Master Data preparation/mgmt
  • ERP Project Cycle Steps 7 6. Project Plan  Task Milestones  Roles and Responsibilities 7. Software Initialization  Ensure infrastructure adequate (Initial)  System checked for complete processes on each transaction type 8. Customization of Forms and  Defines user requirements Reports (Initial) 9. Migration of Historical Data  Beginning Balances  Detail Historical Data Access  Includes Data Clean-up (A/R, A/P, Student) 10. Design of Routines and  Identified in business mapping Workarounds and in fit/gap analysis
  • ERP Project Cycle Steps 8 11. Setup and Configuration 12. Testing Environment  User Acceptance Testing  Used for initial user training 13. End User Training  On set-up, configuration, transaction processing and report generation 14. Final System Walk-through  Sample transactions entered in testing environment  Sign-off phase where project is 15. Go-Live finally implemented  On-going schedule of regular 16. Post Support training  To address turnover/retraining; as well as new features/modules
  • Technology Needs 9  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.
  • Funding 10  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)
  • Planning the Project - Staffing 11  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
  • Planning the Project - Timing 12 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?
  • Planning the Project – Process Mapping 13  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.
  • Planning the Project –Testing & Data Cleanup 14  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!
  • Training 15  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
  • Alamo Colleges – Case Study/Overview 16 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).
  • Alamo Colleges – Case Study/Significant Change 17 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
  • Alamo Colleges – Case Study/New Approach 18  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.
  • Survey Results 19 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
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 1 Has your college started a new ERP (Enterprise Resource Program computer system) implementation in the last 10 years? For comparison purposes only, please provide the Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Yes (please continue) 16 10 100.0% 26 No (thank you, please exit survey) 0 0 0.0% 0 answered question 26 skipped question 0 20
  • 21
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 2 How long did you initially plan to implement all modules? For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count 6-9 months 3 1 15.4% 4 10-12 months 4 1 19.2% 5 13-18 months 4 1 19.2% 5 19-24 months 2 2 15.4% 4 25-36 months 3 2 19.2% 5 Longer than 36 months 0 3 11.5% 3 answered question 26 skipped question 0 22
  • 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: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Yes 5 6 42.3% 11 No 11 4 57.7% 15 Please comment on how long you think it takes to implement each module, 14 from planning to go-live. answered question 26 skipped question 0 23
  • 24
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 4 Which module did you implement first? For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Finance 3 8 42.3% 11 Student 13 1 53.8% 14 Financial Aid 0 0 0.0% 0 Human Resources 0 1 3.8% 1 Payroll 0 0 0.0% 0 Other (please specify) 0 answered question 26 skipped question 0 25
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 5 After your initial implementation, did you have to re-implement any portion of the original ERP? For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Yes 6 2 32.0% 8 No 9 8 68.0% 17 answered question 25 skipped question 1 26
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 6 If yes, please specify which portion(s) you had to re-implement: For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Changed chart of accounts. 5 1 85.7% 6 Eliminated modules from the initial ERP Plan. 3 1 57.1% 4 Implemented third party solution provided by a different vendor. 1 1 28.6% 2 Finance Module 3 0 42.9% 3 Student Module 0 0 0.0% 0 Financial Aid Module 0 0 0.0% 0 Human Resources Module 1 0 14.3% 1 Payroll Module 0 0 0.0% 0 Other (please specify) 2 answered question 7 skipped question 19 Two year Four year institution Other (please specify) institution Had to re-implement the AR detail codes for banner finance since X we implemented this before finance. X Luminus 27
  • 28
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 7 Did you hire additional staff to support existing staff when working on the ERP Implementation? For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Yes 3 8 42.3% 11 No 13 2 57.7% 15 answered question 26 skipped question 0 29
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 8 How many additional staff did you hire during the implementation period? For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Did not add additional staff 12 1 54.2% 13 1-2 FTE 2 3 20.8% 5 3-5 FTE 1 3 16.7% 4 6-10 FTE 0 0 0.0% 0 11-15 FTE 0 0 0.0% 0 More than 15 FTE 0 2 8.3% 2 answered question 24 skipped question 2 30
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 9 Did you lose qualified staff who chose to retire rather than retraining on the new system? For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Did not lose staff 7 4 45.8% 11 1-2 FTE 1 2 12.5% 3 3-5 FTE 4 1 20.8% 5 6-10 FTE 3 1 16.7% 4 11-15 FTE 0 0 0.0% 0 More than 15 FTE 0 1 4.2% 1 Additional comments that apply to this question: 7 answered question 24 skipped question 2 31
  • 32
  • Two year Four year Additional comments that apply to this question: institution institution My college didn't lose staff, but the central IT department and some other colleges in the system X did see retirements. X Too soon to assess. X This is an estimate of staff lost across the entire campus. X I did not lose staff in my department but across the university we did lose staff. X Not determinable Staff losses were due to job changes, not retirement. Job changes were not due to lack of desire X 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 X the purpose of the job tools in the first place 33
  • 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: Two year Four year Rating Response Answer Options institution institution Average 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 34 2.56 3.00 2.71 24
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 11 For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: 20,000 FTE or 10,000 - 5,000 - 9,999 2,500 - 4,999 Less than Response Response Answer Options more 19,999 FTE FTE FTE 2,500 FTE Percent Count Two year institution 1 3 5 1 5 60.0% 15 Four year institution 2 4 2 1 1 40.0% 10 answered question 25 skipped question 0 35
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 13 Which ERP system did you implement? For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count People Soft 0 3 11.5% 3 Sungard SCT Banner 16 7 88.5% 23 DataTel 0 0 0.0% 0 Oracle 0 0 0.0% 0 SAP 0 0 0.0% 0 Other (please specify) 0 answered question 26 skipped question 0 36
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 14 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. Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Up to $499,999 4.5% 1 $500,000 - $1,999,999 9.1% 2 $2,000,000 - $4,999,999 22.7% 5 $5,000,000 - $9,999,999 9.1% 2 $10,000,000 - $19,999,999 9.1% 2 $20,000,000 or more 45.5% 10 answered question 22 skipped question 6 37
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 15 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 For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count Single campus only 3 4 28.0% 7 2-3 0 1 4.0% 1 4-5 1 3 16.0% 4 6-8 0 1 4.0% 1 9-10 0 0 0.0% 0 More than 10 campuses 12 0 48.0% 12 answered question 25 skipped question 1 38
  • ERP Implementation Survey Please tell us about yourself. I am a: For comparison purposes only, please provide the following data on your institution: Two year Four year Response Response Answer Options institution institution Percent Count College administrator (President, VP of Student Services, Dean, etc.) 0 0 0.0% 0 Finance professional (CFO, VP of Finance, Business Officer, Controller, Assistant Controller, Bursar, etc.) 13 8 84.0% 21 IT professional (CIO, VP of IT, IT Project Manager, Database Administrator, etc.) 3 1 16.0% 4 Procurement professional 0 0 0.0% 0 Institutional research professional 0 0 0.0% 0 Student services professional (Fin Aid Director or Advisor, Registrar, Admissions Advisor, Counselor, etc.) 0 0 0.0% 0 Other (please specify) 1 answered question 25 skipped question 1 Two year Four year Other (please specify) institution institution X IT Staff 39
  • ERP Implementation Survey-Question 17 If you could do it all over again, what would you do differently? For comparison purposes only, please provide the Two year Four year Response Answer Options institution institution Count 12 7 19 answered question 19 skipped question 7 Two year Four year Response Text institution institution X 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 X with duplicate people records since consultants each do things 'their way', different checking process, etc. 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 X 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 X 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 X concentrated on the planning and implementation. 40
  • Involve end users more fully in the planning phases Insist on supplemental staffing to support implementation X teams. Include staffing on the implementation team to fully document decisions and new procedures. X I would have delayed the Grants billing module. 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 X 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 X were hired with outside ERP and reporting experience they were treated as a threat, not an asset. X Try to have more fun X Thorough "Fit Gap" analysis X Spend more time up front prior to implementation to assure everything was ready and working correctly I would stagger the related products' implmentation so that we would have more time to digest the training and X 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, X 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 X 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 X 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 X implementations. By the time we got to HR we really had the process nailed down. 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 X complete. X obtain appropriate level of commitment from sr. mgmt. communicate, communicate, communicate... 41
  • ERP Implementation 42 Questions?